Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY
RESEARCH SCHOLAR GRANT
POLICIES AND INSTRUCTIONS
EFFECTIVE JULY 2019
ELECTRONIC APPLICATION DEADLINE: OCTOBER 15, 2019
PAPER APPLICATION COPY DEADLINE: OCTOBER 16, 2019
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY, INC. Extramural Research Department 250 Williams Street, NW, 6th Floor
Atlanta, GA 30303
Voice: (404) 329-7558 Fax: (404) 417-5974
Web site: http://www.cancer.org
Email: [email protected]
Applicants are strongly advised to verify their eligibility prior to preparing an
application. Applications that do not comply with eligibility criteria will be administratively disapproved. Complete requirements and instructions are included in
this document.
MISSION
The American Cancer Society's mission is to save lives, celebrate lives, and lead the
fight for a world without cancer.
RESEARCH SCHOLAR GRANTS
POLICIES
CONTENTS
1. OVERVIEW OF THE EXTRAMURAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING GRANTS PROGRAM OF THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY ........................................ 2
2. AUTHORITY FOR MAKING GRANTS ................................................................ 10 3. SOURCE OF FUNDS .......................................................................................... 10 4. WHO MAY APPLY .............................................................................................. 10 5. TOBACCO-INDUSTRY FUNDING POLICY ........................................................ 10 6. COLLABORATIONS WITH ACS INTRAMURAL SCIENTISTS (IF APPLICABLE)
........................................................................................................................... 11 7. ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS AND INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES ............. 12 8. PEER REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS................................................................... 13 9. APPLICATION DEADLINES ............................................................................... 14 10. NOTIFICATION OF APPLICATION RECEIPT AND REVIEW ............................ 15 11. GRANT MANAGEMENT AND PAYMENTS ........................................................ 16 12. ANNUAL AND FINAL PROGRESS REPORTS ................................................... 16 13. PUBLICATIONS AND OTHER GRANT-RELATED COMMUNICATIONS ........... 17 14. FINANCIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS ............................................................ 18 15. EXPENDITURES ................................................................................................ 18 16. OWNERSHIP OF EQUIPMENT .......................................................................... 19 17. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ............................................................... 19 18. REQUEST FOR GRANT MODIFICATIONS ........................................................ 22 19. CANCELLATION OF GRANT ............................................................................. 23 20. RESEARCH SCHOLAR GRANTS OVERVIEW .................................................. 23 21. ELIGIBILITY RULES ........................................................................................... 25 22. TERM AND BUDGET .......................................................................................... 27 23. EXPENDITURES ................................................................................................ 28 24. CHANGE OF INSTITUTION ................................................................................ 28 APPENDIX A: GUIDELINES FOR MAINTAINING RESEARCH AND PEER REVIEW INTEGRITY ................................................................................................................... 29
APPENDIX B: INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING DELIVERABLES......................... 38
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
2
1. OVERVIEW OF THE EXTRAMURAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING GRANTS PROGRAM OF THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY
The American Cancer Society’s Extramural Research Program primarily supports beginning
investigators, across a wide range of disciplines, in innovative cancer-control research and
training to meet critically important needs in the control of cancer.
Each year the Society receives approximately 1,500 grant requests. All undergo rigorous,
independent peer review to identify the most meritorious projects for funding.
The Society offers extramural support for research and training via the programs described
below. For program-specific information, please see Section 20.
GRANT MECHANISMS
RESEARCH GRANTS FOR INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATORS
Research Scholar Grants provide resources for investigator-initiated research projects in a
variety of cancer-relevant areas.
• Eligibility
Applicants must be independent, self-directed researchers within 6 years of their first
academic appointment. Clinician scientists who remain active in patient care must be
within eight years of their first academic appointment. Applicants typically must be
within 12 years of receiving a terminal (doctorate) degree and cannot have more than one
R01/R01-like grant (>$100,000 per year direct costs for more than three years) as
principal investigator at the time of application.
RSG applicants to ONLY the Cancer Control and Prevention Research Program may be
at any career stage, provided that the focus of their project is either: 1) health
policy/health services research or 2) achieving cancer health equity. These applicants
must also meet the RSG eligibility requirements (described above).
• Funding
The maximum award covers four years with up to $165,000 per year (direct costs), plus
20% allowable indirect costs. Additionally, population-based studies that address cancer
health equity may propose up to a maximum of five years and $400,000 per year (direct
costs), plus 20% allowable indirect costs.
For the RSG award in the Cancer Control and Prevention Research Program with a focus
on health disparities or health policies/services, the maximum award is for four years at
up to $165,000 per year (direct costs), plus 20% allowable indirect costs.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
3
Institutional Research Grants (IRG) are awarded to institutions as block grants, providing seed
money for newly independent investigators to initiate cancer research projects.
• Eligibility
The principal investigator of the grant, who will also serve as the chair of the local IRG
Committee, should be a senior faculty member.
• Funding
Grants to institutions cover one to three years, average $120,000 per year and may be
renewed.
Mission Boost Grants (MBG) are opportunities for ACS grantees to seek additional (“boost”)
resources for innovative high-risk/high-reward projects. MBGs potentially offer two stages of
funding.
The Primary Boost requires the investigator to develop outcome-specific, unequivocal
milestones that reduce the risks of studying a new drug, device, or procedure in patients.
• Eligibility
Current and former ACS grantees with innovative projects who:
• Have held or currently hold one of these grants (or previous versions of such
awards): Research Scholarship Grant (RSG), Mentored Research Scholar Grant
(MRSG), Cancer Control Career Development Awards (CCCDA), or Pilot and
Exploratory Projects in Palliative Care (PEP) award.
• Have held one of the above ACS grants for a minimum of one year. Note: For
current ACS grantees, we recommend delaying submission of letter of intent
(LOI) until the last year of the grant, since part of the LOI review may include
consideration of discoveries made under ACS support; and
• Are currently independent, full-time faculty at a not-for-profit, US-based research
institution that has facilities and support to enable preclinical and clinical studies.
• Funding
A maximum of $100,000 direct, plus 20% indirect costs per year and may be requested
for up to two years (Total: $240,000).
The Secondary Boost supports testing in cancer patients.
• Eligibility
Only MBG recipients who have completed and submitted Primary Boost milestones for
approval.
• Funding
A maximum of $300,000 direct plus 20% indirect costs (Total: $360,000) and may be
requested for up to 18 months.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
4
Pilot and Exploratory Projects in Palliative Care of Cancer Patients and their Families
support investigators performing such research studies to test interventions, develop research
methodologies, and explore novel areas of research in palliative care of cancer patients and their
families. Applications will be accepted via the Pilot and Exploratory Grants Mechanism.
• Eligibility
Investigators in areas of palliative care.
• Funding
The maximum award is for two years and up to $60,000 per year (direct costs) plus 20%
indirect costs.
MENTORED TRAINING GRANTS
Postdoctoral Fellowships fund training for a career in cancer research for researchers with a
doctoral degree.
• Eligibility
Researchers who are US citizens or permanent residents and within four years of
receiving a doctoral degree.
• Funding
Awards may cover up to three years with progressive stipends of $48,000, $50,000, and
$52,000 per year, plus a $4,000 per year fellowship allowance. In addition, $1,500 will be
provided in the last year for travel costs, either to the biennial ACS Jiler Professors and
Fellows Conference or to another scientific meeting in the US.
Clinician Scientist Development Grants support protected time to allow junior faculty who see
patients to be mentored and participate in research training, thus aiding their development as
independent clinician scientists. These investigators pursue questions relevant to improving
health across the cancer research continuum.
• Eligibility
Applicants must be full-time faculty and within the first six years of their initial
appointment. They must have a clinical doctoral degree with an active license to provide
patient care and actively seeing patients.
• Funding
Awards range from three to five years and up to $135,000 per year (direct costs), plus 8%
allowable indirect costs. A maximum of $10,000 per year for the mentor(s) (regardless of
the number of mentors) may be included in the $135,000.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
5
HEALTH PROFESSIONAL TRAINING GRANTS
Physician Training Awards in Cancer Prevention are reserved for institutions. They support
physician training in accredited preventive medicine residency programs that provide cancer
prevention and control research and practice opportunities.
• Eligibility
Applications are generally submitted by the program director from accredited general
preventive medicine or occupational and environmental residency programs.
• Funding
Awards cover four and one half years with a total amount of $300,000, based on an
average of $50,000 per resident training year. These grants are renewable.
Doctoral Training Grants in Oncology Social Work support doctoral students conducting
research related to oncology social work.
• Eligibility
Students with a master’s degree in social work enrolled in a doctoral program in an
accredited school of social work.
• Funding
Initial two-year grants provide a stipend of $20,000 per year with the possibility of a two-
year renewal.
Master’s Training Grants in Clinical Oncology Social Work, awarded to institutions, support
training for second year master’s degree students in oncology social work.
• Eligibility
Applicants are MSW-prepared field instructors at clinical placement sites that are
affiliated with accredited schools of social work with health care or mental health care
concentrations and provide students the opportunity to concentrate in pediatric or adult
oncology.
• Funding
The grant term is two years with annual funding of $12,000 (up to $10,000 for the student
$2,000 for faculty professional development). These grants can be renewed.
Doctoral Degree Scholarships in Cancer Nursing support study in a doctoral degree program
in nursing or a related area, preparing the graduate for a career as a cancer nurse scientist.
• Eligibility
Licensed registered nurses enrolled in an accredited academic institution that can award a
doctoral degree.
• Funding
The initial award is for two years and $15,000 per year; it may be renewed for an
additional two years.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
6
Graduate Scholarships in Cancer Nursing Practice support graduate students pursuing a
master’s degree in cancer nursing or a doctorate of nursing practice.
• Eligibility
Licensed registered nurses applying to or enrolled in accredited schools of nursing.
• Funding
Awards may be for up to two years with a stipend of $10,000 per year.
PROFESSOR AWARDS
Professor Awards provide unique research opportunities that foster creativity and innovation in
cancer research. Professor Awards provide flexible funding for outstanding individuals who have
made seminal contributions that have changed and will continue to change the direction of
cancer or cancer control research.
Research Professor Awards support outstanding mid-career investigators in cancer research.
Clinical Research Professor Awards support outstanding mid-career investigators in areas of
clinical, psychosocial, behavioral, health policy, or epidemiologic cancer research.
• Eligibility
Applicants for either award must have attained the rank of full professor, but for no more
than 15 years at this rank. The annual deadline is October 15 for Clinical Research
Professor Awards or April 1 for Research Professor Awards.
• Funding
Both awards are for five years at $80,000 per year, in the total amount of $400,000 in
unrestricted funds, and may be renewed once.
INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM
Audrey Meyer Mars International Fellowships in Clinical Oncology support one year of
advanced training in clinical oncology at participating United States (US) cancer centers.
• Eligibility
Non-US citizens—qualified physicians and dentists from other countries, particularly
those where advanced oncology training is not readily available.
• Funding
This program provides up to US $65,000 for one year.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
7
REQUESTS FOR APPLICATION (RFAs)
Research Scholar Grant in the Role of Health Policy and Healthcare Insurance in
Improving Access to Care and Performance in Cancer Prevention, Early Detection, and
Treatment Services supports investigations evaluating the impact of changes occurring in the
health care system with a focus on cancer prevention, control, and treatment.
Improving access to care may also reduce inequities and health disparities. New health public
policy initiatives—for example, the new federal and state marketplaces that have expanded
insurance coverage, as well as Medicaid expansion in some states—create natural experiments
ripe for evaluation. Research funded by this RFA focuses on the changes in national, state,
and/or local policy and the response to these changes by health care systems, insurers, payers,
communities, practices, and patients.
Applications will be accepted via the Research Scholar Grant in Cancer Control and Prevention
Program.
• Eligibility
Investigators evaluating changes in the health care system with a focus on cancer.
• Funding
Award length and budget limits vary; please see the Research Scholar Grant policies and
instructions for a detailed description of this RFA.
SPECIAL INITIATIVE
PRIORITY FOCUS ON HEALTH EQUITY RESEARCH IN THE CANCER CONTROL
AND PREVENTION RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM
Despite the steady overall decline in cancer incidence and mortality rates in the United States,
not all population groups have benefited equally. Differences exist among subgroups in rates of
incidence, prevalence, mortality, and related adverse health conditions. As highlighted in reports
by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Institute of Medicine, health
disparities are linked to interrelated risk factors that extend across the life span (Braveman,
2014).
However, if the existing knowledge about cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment were
delivered equally, disparities in cancer could be substantially reduced or eliminated. Achieving
health equity through inclusive health and social systems, in which all people are treated
equitably, creates conditions for improving health outcomes.
The American Cancer Society (ACS) has a long and ongoing history of advocacy, education,
community outreach, and research in the area of cancer disparities.
Social determinants of health include environmental conditions—the influence of the world in
which people are born, live, play, thrive, work and worship—and the availability of health care
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
8
systems. The economic, political and social policies that shape communities are integral to these
influences.
Individual determinants of health include biology, genetics, and individual behaviors and
characteristics. Health disparities are related to age, gender, disability status, ethnicity, race,
geography, income, language, social class, or sexual orientation. The National Stakeholder
Strategy for Achieving Health Equity, supported by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services Office of Minority Health, presents an action-oriented blueprint to move the nation
towards achieving health equity, by combating health disparities with a comprehensive,
community-driven approach. The ACS has overlapping goals and is committed to addressing
cancer health equity through research, education, advocacy, and service.
The ACS Extramural Research and Training Grants Department identifies research addressing
health equity as a priority, and RSG grant applications to its Cancer Control and Prevention
Research Program are welcome from principal investigators at any career stage. These should
focus on eliminating disparities through either psychosocial and behavioral research, or in health
policy and health services research.
This expanded eligibility is unique to projects Targeting Health Equity and Health Disparities in
Cancer Prevention and Control. Applicants must explicitly specify the following within the
application:
• relevance to cancer generally and cancer disparities specifically;
• how findings from the proposed research will substantially improve equity in access to
cancer prevention, early detection, diagnosis, and/or treatment services; and
• how findings may be applied to more quickly advance efforts to reduce cancer burden or
costs, improve quality of care or quality of life, and/or save more lives.
All cancer health-equity applications must target two or more determinants of health. Population-
based health equity studies must also target two or more levels of influence (individual,
interpersonal, organizational, community, or public policy) to propose interventions focused on
achieving health equity. (McLeroy et al., 1988; CDC, 2014).
Applications will be accepted using one of four mechanisms:
• Postdoctoral Fellowship
• Clinician Scientist Development Grant
• Research Scholar Grant
• Clinical Research Professor Award
References:
Braveman P. What Are Health Disparities and Health Equity? We Need to Be Clear. Nursing in
3D: Diversity, Disparities, and Social Determinants. Public Health Reports. 2014 Supplement 2;
129:1-8
McLeroy KR1, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion
programs. Health Educ Q. 1988; 15(4):351-77.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
9
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Colorectal Cancer Control Program: Social
Ecological Model. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/crccp/sem.htm
GRANT PROGRAM OFFICES
HEALTH PROFESSIONAL TRAINING IN CANCER CONTROL — Virginia Krawiec,
MPA, Scientific Director
This program supports nurses, physicians, and social workers pursuing training in cancer
prevention and control practice. The goal is to accelerate the wide application of research
findings by increasing the number of these professionals with expertise and career commitment
to cancer control.
MOLECULAR GENETICS AND BIOCHEMISTRY OF CANCER — Michael Melner,
PhD, Senior Scientific Director
This program focuses on genes involved in cancer and the role their alterations (mutations,
deletions, and amplifications) play in the process. Of particular interest is the examination of the
molecules involved in cancer (proteins, nucleic acids, lipids, and carbohydrates) and how their
activities affect these diseases. The program highlights new targets for prevention, detection, and
treatment of cancer.
CANCER CELL BIOLOGY AND METASTASIS — Charles Saxe, PhD, Senior Scientific
Director
The primary goal of this program is to provide an understanding of the nature of cancer cells, so
they can be more effectively controlled and eliminated. Emphases include understanding the
fundamental controls of normal and cancer cells, with a focus on how cells regulate when to
grow, when to divide, and when to die; how cells create an identity; how cells relate to the local
environment and to other cells; and how cells regulate when and how to move from one site to
another.
TRANSLATIONAL CANCER RESEARCH — Lynne Elmore, PhD, Scientific Director
This program focuses on the interface between laboratory investigations and human testing. The
program supports investigations of the role of the microbiome and infectious diseases in cancer;
microbial-based cancer therapies; the discovery, synthesis, and delivery of cancer drugs; the
creation and use of animal models of cancer; and biomarker identification/development.
CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH, NUTRITION, AND IMMUNOLOGY — Susanna
Greer, PhD, Scientific Director
This program focuses on therapies for cancer. It includes basic, preclinical, clinical, and
epidemiological investigations of immunotherapy, inflammatory responses, immunosurvellience,
and innate and adaptive immune responses. Emphases include development and application of
new imaging and bioanalytical tools and techniques, and how the exposome, nutrition, physical
activity, and environment impact cancer prevention, initiation, progression, and treatment.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
10
CANCER CONTROL AND PREVENTION RESEARCH —Elvan C. Daniels, MD, MPH,
Scientific Director
This program focuses on the development and testing of interventions to influence health
behaviors and health-care delivery. Research projects in this program focus on cancer risk
reduction and delivery of high-quality health promotion, screening, early detection, and
treatment services. The program also includes projects directed at health services, outcomes, and
policy research to assess the effectiveness of interventions and the impact of polices on access to
care, quality of care, and costs of care. Special emphasis is placed on health-equity research
addressing disparities in disadvantaged groups and the social determinants of health that drive
inequities.
2. AUTHORITY FOR MAKING GRANTS
All ACS grants and awards are made by the Chief Executive Officer on behalf of the Society’s
Board of Directors.
3. SOURCE OF FUNDS
The ACS obtains its funds principally from public donations collected annually by our many
dedicated volunteers. To disseminate information about the Society’s Extramural Research and
Training Grants Program to volunteers and the public, grantees may occasionally be asked to
give brief presentations to professional and lay audiences.
4. WHO MAY APPLY
Applicants for the Clinician Scientist Development Grant and Postdoctoral Fellowships must be,
at the time of application, United States citizens, or permanent residents. There are no citizenship
requirements for any other grants.
The Society will allow only one designated individual as principal investigator, responsible and
accountable for the overall conduct of the project; the Society does not recognize co-principal
investigators.
Although applicants may apply for multiple awards, a grantee may not be the principal
investigator on more than one ACS grant at any time. Exceptions are made for recipients of
grants in response to RFAs and for principal investigators of Institutional Research Grants,
Mission Boost Grants or TheoryLab pilot projects.
5. TOBACCO-INDUSTRY FUNDING POLICY
Scientific investigators or health professionals who are funded for any project by the tobacco
industry, or whose named mentors are so funded, are not eligible for American Cancer Society
(ACS) grants. Any of these who accept tobacco-industry funding during the term of a grant must
inform the Society, whereupon the grant will be terminated.
Tobacco industry funding includes:
• Funds from a company that is engaged, or whose affiliates are engaged, in the
manufacture of tobacco produced for human use;
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
11
• Funds in the name of a tobacco brand, whether or not the brand name is used solely for
tobacco goods; and
• Funds from a body set up by the tobacco industry or by 1 or more companies in the
industry.
The following do not constitute tobacco industry funding:
• Legacies funds from tobacco industry investments (unless the name of a tobacco
company or cigarette brand is associated with them);
• Funds from a trust or foundation established with assets related to the tobacco industry,
but which no longer have any connection with the industry, even though the entity may
bear a name that for historical reasons is associated with the tobacco industry.
Tobacco industry funding is defined for purposes of Society grants and awards applicants and
recipients as money provided or used for any costs for research, including personnel,
consumables, equipment, buildings, travel, meetings, and conferences, or operating costs for
laboratories and offices. It does not include meetings or conferences unrelated to a particular
research project.
6. COLLABORATIONS WITH ACS INTRAMURAL SCIENTISTS (IF APPLICABLE)
1) If an extramural scientist is planning a collaboration with an ACS intramural scientist, and
they meet all other requirement of eligibility, they may be eligible to submit an application.
Such collaborations are not required.
2) In most cases, the use of ACS research resources requires that at least one ACS intramural
scientist be included as a collaborator on a grant application. Therefore, prior to submission
of an application, the collaboration between extramural scientists and intramural scientists
must be established according to the policies and procedures of ACS Intramural Research.
3) Intramural scientists and their staff may participate in grants and contracts in many ways,
including:
• Serving as unpaid consultants, collaborators, co-investigators, or mentors. Intramural
scientists may not serve as a principal investigator on an ACS grant or contract.
• Contributing to the conceptualization, design, execution, or interpretation of a research
study.
• Having primary responsibility for a specific aim within a standard research grant
mechanism.
• Developing or contributing data for an extramural collaboration.
• Participating in a multi-institutional collaborative arrangement with extramural
researchers for clinical, prevention, or epidemiological studies.
4) ACS intramural scientists may not receive salary support, travel expenses, or other funds
from ACS-funded grants or contracts.
5) Intramural and extramural scientists may have access to reagents, laboratory equipment,
and/or data to conduct the extramurally funded portion of the research, as established in
their collaborative agreement.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
12
6) While intramural scientists may write a description of the work to be performed by the
intramural department, they may not write an applicant’s grant application or contract
proposal. However, the intramural scientist(s) should review and approve sections relevant
to the collaboration.
7) ACS intramural scientist participation must comply with disclosure, non-disclosure, and
conflict-of-interest regulations.
8) ACS intramural scientists must file annual and final research reports related to their
activities associated with any grant or contract awarded through the Extramural Research
Department.
1Adapted from document NIH Policy 54815 Implementation of Cooperative Agreement,
“Funding of Intramural Research Program/Extramural Research Program Collaborations”
[http://sourcebook.od.nih.gov/ethic-conduct/fund-irp-erp-3-00.htm], and “Opportunities and
Guidelines to Facilitate Scientific Collaborations”
[http://www.niaid.nih.gov/researchfunding/grant/Pages/extraintracollab.aspx]
7. ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS AND INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The Society’s grants and awards are made to not-for-profit institutions located within the United
States and its territories. A not-for-profit institution is one that can provide upon request:
• A current letter from the Internal Revenue Service conferring 501(c)(3) status;
• Evidence of an active research program with a track record of extramural funding and
publications in peer reviewed journals; and
• Documentation of appropriate resources and infrastructure to support the proposed
research. These include, but are not limited to:
o Adequate facilities and services;
o Fiscal and grants management infrastructure to ensure compliance with ACS
policies, and with federal policies regarding protections for human and animal
subjects (e.g., a sponsored-projects office or a contract with an IRB or IACUC);
o A process for appointment and promotion equivalent to those in academic settings
for staff scientists; and
o Evidence of education, training, and mentoring for fellows and beginning
researchers appropriate to the grant mechanism.
Grant applications will not be accepted, nor will grants be made, for research conducted at
• For-profit institutions;
• Federal government agencies (including the National Laboratories);
• Organizations supported entirely by the federal government (except postdoctoral
fellowship applications);
• Organizations that primarily benefit federal government entities, such as foundations
operated by or for the benefit of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMC). However,
qualified academic institutions may submit applications on behalf of a VAMC if a Dean’s
Committee Memorandum of Affiliation is in effect between the 2 institutions.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
13
The American Cancer Society does not assume responsibility for the conduct of the activities
that the grant supports, or for the acts of the grant recipient, because both are under the direction
and control of the grantee institution and subject to its medical and scientific policies.
Every grantee institution must safeguard the rights and welfare of individuals who participate as
subjects in research activities by reviewing proposed activities through an institutional review
board (IRB), as specified by the National Institutes of Health Office for Human Research
Protections of the US Department of Health and Human Services.
Furthermore, applicants, applicant institutions, and grantee institutions must adhere to DHHS
guidelines as well as ACS guidelines regarding conflicts of interest, recombinant DNA, scientific
misconduct, as well as all other applicable ACS policies and procedures.
To signify agreement by the institution to all ACS policies and procedures, an application for a
grant must bear the signatures of the official authorized to sign for the institution and the
appropriate department head. Additional signatures are at the discretion of the institution.
The institution is responsible for verifying that all documentation related to the application and
grant is correct, including all representations made by any named researcher (e.g. position or
title). Further, the institution is responsible for verifying that the applicant is either a US citizen
or permanent resident with a Resident Alien Card (“Green Card”) where applicable. If the award
does not require US citizenship or permanent residency, the institution is responsible for
documenting the applicant’s legal eligibility to work in the US for the duration of the award. For
postdoctoral fellowships, if the terminal degree is granted after submission of the application, the
institution must verify that the degree has been awarded prior to grant activation.
It is the responsibility of the institution to immediately report to ACS any finding that any
information presented to ACS in connection with the application and/or grant was false. It is also
the responsibility of the institution to immediately report to ACS any action including
recertification, loss of certification, breach of contract, misconduct, or change in employment
status for a named researcher with the institution. This includes administrative leave, which may
occur during the term of any award pertinent to the work described in the grant application.
Failure to abide by the terms above, or by any other ACS policy or procedures, may result in
suspension or cancellation of the grant, at the sole discretion of ACS.
By accepting an American Cancer Society award, you agree to the Guidelines for
Maintaining Research and Peer Review Integrity found in the appendix of these policies.
8. PEER REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS
The Society's scientific directors distribute applications to the most appropriate peer review
committee, and then assign each application to at least 2 committee members for independent
and confidential review. Each committee generally has between 12 and 25 members who are
leaders in their areas of expertise, plus up to 3 other stakeholders. A stakeholder is an individual
usually without formal training as a scientist or health professional who has a strong personal
interest in advancing the effort to control and prevent cancer through research and training. This
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
14
interest could stem from a personal experience with the disease, such as survivorship, a family
cancer experience, or caregiving.
Peer review committees use application evaluation criteria that vary depending on the grant
mechanism. See individual instructions for details.
After the peer review committee discusses and votes to prioritize the most competitive
applications, it provides its recommendations, along with critiques of the applications and
fundable scores, to the Council for Extramural Research.
After considering the relative merit of the applications, the amount of available funds, and the
Society’s objectives, the Council determines which grants will be funded during each cycle. No
voting member of a peer review committee or of the Council may be a member of the Society’s
staff or Board of Directors.
In general, applications for research grants that are not funded may be revised and resubmitted
twice; postdoctoral fellowship applications may only be resubmitted once. Resubmitted
applications are reviewed in the same detail as new applications and compete with them on an
equal basis. (See instructions for resubmission of applications.)
9. APPLICATION DEADLINES
Applications for grants and awards must be submitted as paper and electronic copies via
proposalCENTRAL on the American Cancer Society website www.cancer.org (see Instructions).
The electronic applications must be submitted by 5:00 PM ET on the specified deadline date, and
a paper copy is due one business day later. If the deadline falls on a weekend or holiday,
applications will be accepted the following business day.
No supplemental materials will be accepted after the deadline unless requested by ACS staff or
reviewers.
DEADLINE, REVIEW, NOTIFICATION, AND ACTIVATION SCHEDULE
GRANTS Application*
Deadline
Peer Review
Meeting
Preliminary
Notification
Council
Meeting
Grantee
Notification Activation
Research Scholar
Grant
April 1
October 15
June
January
August
March
September
March
October
April
January 1
July 1
Mentored Research
Scholar Grant
Clinician Scientist
Development Grant
April 1
October 15
June
January
August
March
September
March
October
April
January 1
July 1
Postdoctoral
Fellowship
April 1
October 15
June
January
August
March
September
March
October
April
January 1
July 1
Pilot and
Exploratory Projects
April 1
October 15
June
January
August
March
September
March
October
April
January 1
July 1
DISCONTINUED; See Clinician Scientist Development Grant
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
15
Institutional
Research Grant April 1 June August September October January 1
Physician Training
Award in Cancer
Prevention
April 1 June August September October January 1
Research Professor
Award
LOI Deadline:
February 1 June NA September October January 1
Application
Deadline: April 1
Clinical Research
Professor Award
LOI Deadline:
August 1 January NA March April July 1
Application
Deadline: October 15
Mission Boost Grant
LOI Deadline:
March 1 August September September October January 1
Application
Deadline: July 15
Doctoral Training
Grant in Oncology
Social Work
Application
Deadline: October 15 January March March April July 1
Master’s Training
Grant in Clinical
Oncology Social
Work
October 15 January March March April July 1
Cancer Control
Career Development
Award
Doctoral Degree
Scholarship in
Cancer Nursing
October 15 January March March April July 1
Graduate
Scholarship in
Cancer Nursing
Practice
November 1 January March March April July 1
Audrey Meyer Mars
International
Fellowships in
Clinical Oncology
October 15 January March March April July 1
*Paper copy is due one business day following the deadline for the electronic copy.
10. NOTIFICATION OF APPLICATION RECEIPT AND REVIEW
Approximately one month after receipt of the application, applicants will receive an email
acknowledgment providing an application number, the assigned peer review committee, and the
name of their Scientific Director with contact information. This email will be sent to the address in
the professional profile supplied at the time of submission in proposalCENTRAL. Be certain the
email address listed in your professional profile is active, since it will be used to notify you
throughout the review and award process.
DISCONTINUED; See Clinician Scientist Career Development Grant
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
16
Preliminary Notification and Likelihood of Funding. Following review of an application,
preliminary information regarding its status will be emailed, with links to copies of the
reviewers’ critiques. This notification will also indicate the likelihood of funding, described by
one of the following phrases:
• Your application has been recommended for funding.
• We cannot predict the likelihood of funding at this time.
• Your application is not likely to be funded.
All final funding decisions are made by the Council for Extramural Research, which typically
meets in March and September.
The Scientific Director and Program Coordinator will shepherd your application through the entire
process. Applicants may call the Extramural Research Department at any time during the cycle;
after carefully considering the critiques, applicants are encouraged to contact their Scientific
Director to discuss their review. Applicants considering resubmission are strongly encouraged to
reach out in advance of the next deadline.
11. GRANT MANAGEMENT AND PAYMENTS
New grantees will receive a packet of information with instructions for activating the award. The
activation form as well as other important information about the grant can also be found at
https://proposalcentral.altum.com. (Select the Award tab to see the Post Award Management
site.)
Grant payments will be made at the end of each month, except for nursing scholarships and
social work grants, which are made once yearly at the beginning of the year. The American
Cancer Society makes all payments to the sponsoring institution and mails them to the address
shown on the grant activation form.
Acknowledgement of payment by the sponsoring institution is not required. Continued funding
by ACS throughout the grant period is contingent upon the institution’s compliance with all
terms related to the grant; failure to comply with all of the grant terms may result in a suspension
or cancellation of the grant, to be determined by ACS at its sole discretion.
Personnel compensated in whole or in part with funds from the American Cancer Society are not
employees of the Society. Consequently, institutions are responsible for issuing appropriate IRS
tax filings for all individuals receiving compensation from ACS grants, and for withholding and
paying all required federal, state, and local payroll taxes for such compensation. Any tax
consequences are the responsibility of the individual recipient and the sponsoring institution. We
advise all grant and award recipients to consult a tax advisor regarding the status of their awards.
12. ANNUAL AND FINAL PROGRESS REPORTS
The following policies apply to Research Scholar Grants, Mentored Research Scholar Grants,
Clinician Scientist Development Grant, and Postdoctoral Fellowships. For all other grants, see
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
17
the appropriate sections on Required Progress Reports. Annual and final reports represent a
critical part of responsible stewardship of the donated dollars, and we greatly appreciate your
assistance in fulfilling this important commitment to our donors and yours.
A. Both nontechnical and scientific progress reports are to be submitted each year within 60
days after the first and subsequent anniversaries of the start date of the grant. Final reports
are due within 60 days after the grant has terminated. Forms for these reports can be found
at https://proposalcentral.altum.com.
B. The final report should cover the entire grant period. In the event a grant has been extended
without additional funds, the final report is not due until 60 days after the official
termination date of the grant. If the grant is terminated early, a final report must still be
completed within 60 days of the termination date.
C. Grantees must submit reports in a timely manner. If this is not possible, a grantee must
make a written request to extend the reporting deadline. Noncompliance may result in the
withholding of payment on all grants in effect at the recipient institution until reports are
received.
D. Please note that up-to-date annual reports are required when requesting any grant
modifications, including transfers or no-cost extensions.
13. PUBLICATIONS AND OTHER GRANT-RELATED COMMUNICATIONS
When and how to acknowledge your ACS grant:
Publications resulting from research or training activities supported by the American Cancer
Society must contain the following acknowledgment: “Supported by [name of grant and number]
from the American Cancer Society.” When there are multiple sources of support, the
acknowledgment should read “Supported in part by [name of grant and number] from the
American Cancer Society,” along with references to other funding sources. The Society’s support should also be acknowledged by the grantee and the institution in all
public communication of work resulting from this grant, including scientific abstracts (where
permitted), posters at scientific meetings, press releases or other media communications, and
internet-based communications.
Although there is no formal ACS approval process for publications by Society grantees, it is
helpful to notify your Scientific Director when manuscripts have been accepted for publication.
This will allow ample time to for additional public or Society-wide notifications. If your
institution plans a press release involving any of your Society-supported research, please notify
the ACS communications representative (phone number on your award letter) or your Scientific
Director in advance.
ACS grants to you a limited, revocable, non-transferable license to use the ACS logo (as shown
below) in association with your funded work. We encourage you to use it on scientific posters,
Power Point presentations, and any other visual presentation about your funded work where the
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
18
ACS is noted as a funding source. In turn, you agree to provide any materials featuring the ACS
logo upon our request.
Permission to use the logo is limited to the uses outlined in the above paragraph. It should not
imply ACS endorsement of products such as guidelines, websites, software for mobile devices
(apps), tool kits, and so on.
14. FINANCIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS
A report of expenditures must be submitted within 90 days of the grant’s expiration date shown
in the award letter; annual financial reports are not required. Any change in terms, such as a no-
cost extension, will alter a report’s due date. The necessary forms can be found at
https://proposalcentral.altum.com.
Signatures of the principal investigator and the institution’s financial officer are required. Any
unexpended funds must be returned to the Society.
Grantees must submit financial reports in a timely manner. If this is not possible, a grantee must
make a written request to extend the reporting deadline. Noncompliance may result in the
withholding of payment on all grants in effect at the recipient institution until reports are
received.
Institutions must maintain separate accounts for each grant, with substantiating invoices
available for audit by representatives of the American Cancer Society. The Society is not
responsible for expenditures made prior to the start date of the grant, costs incurred after
termination or cancellation of the grant, commitments against a grant not paid within 60 days
following the expiration date, or any expenditure that exceed the total amount of the award. (See
also Section 19, “Cancellation.”)
Note: The Institutional Research Grant has different reporting requirements, found in the
Required Financial Reports section in the IRG policies.
15. EXPENDITURES
American Cancer Society research grants are not designed to cover the total cost of the research
proposed or the investigator's entire compensation. The grantee's institution is expected to provide
the required physical facilities and administrative services normally available at an institution.
For grants that allow indirect costs, the calculation of allowable indirect costs includes all budget
items except permanent equipment. See the Instructions for allowable expenditures for Health
Professional Training Grants (Nursing Scholarships, Social Work Training Grants, and Physician
Training Awards in Cancer Prevention).
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
19
The Society's research grants do not provide funds (direct budget) for such items as:
• Travel
o Foreign travel (special consideration is given for attendance at scientific meetings held
in Canada).
• Administrative
o Secretarial or administrative salaries.
o Membership dues.
• Tuition, books, and fees
o Student tuition and fees (graduate or undergraduate). However, tuition is an allowable
expense for the principal investigator of a Clinician Scientist Development Grant.
o Books and periodicals, except required texts for coursework in the approved training
plan for Clinician Scientist Development Grants.
• Office or laboratory setup and expenses
o Office and laboratory furniture.
o Office equipment and supplies.
o Rental of office or laboratory space.
o Construction, renovation, or maintenance of buildings or laboratories.
• Other
o Recruiting and relocation expenses.
o Non-medical services to patients (travel to a clinical site or patient incentives are
allowable expenses).
Society research and training grant funds can be used for computers for research and training
purposes, which can be purchased with direct funds from the equipment budget. See specific
policies for different funding mechanisms.
16. OWNERSHIP OF EQUIPMENT
Equipment purchased under American Cancer Society research grants or grant extensions is for the
use of the principal investigator and collaborators. Title of such equipment shall be vested in the
institution at which the principal investigator is conducting the research. In the event the American
Cancer Society authorizes the transfer of a grant to another institution, equipment necessary for
continuation of the research project purchased with the grant funds may be transferred to the new
institution, and title to such equipment shall be vested in the new institution.
17. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
As a not-for-profit organization supported by public contributions, the Society believes it has the
responsibility to adopt policies and practices that enhance the likelihood that potentially
beneficial discoveries and inventions will be exploited to the benefit of humankind. It is the
desire of the Society that such inventions be administered in such a manner that they are brought
into public use at the earliest possible time. The Society recognizes that often this may be best
accomplished through patenting and/or licensing of such inventions. Accordingly, the Society
has adopted the following patent policy that is binding on all Grantees and Not-for-profit Grantee
Institutions (hereinafter "Grantee"), excluding postdoctoral fellowship Grantees at the National
Institutes of Health and other government laboratories, for whom the applicable patent policies
of the federal government shall apply. Acceptance of a grant from the Society constitutes
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
20
acceptance of the terms and conditions of this policy. It is a goal of the Society that the terms
and conditions of this policy not conflict with the established patent policy of the Grantee.
A. All notices required pursuant to this policy shall be in writing, and in this policy, the
following terms shall have the meaning set forth below.
i. "Invention" shall mean any potentially patentable discovery, material, method, process,
product, program, software or use.
ii. "Funded Invention" shall mean any Invention made in the course of research funded in
whole or in part by this Society grant.
iii. "Public Disclosure" shall mean any publication, presentation, offer for sale or any activity
that would affect the patentability of the invention under 35 USC. § 102 or 103.
iv. "Net Income" shall mean gross income received by Grantee in respect of a Funded
Invention less inventor distributions in accordance with Grantee policy, payments to joint
holders of Funded Invention, and unreimbursed directly assignable out-of-pocket
expenses resulting from patenting and licensing for Funded Invention.
B. Grantee shall notify the Society of each Funded Invention made by Grantee within thirty
(30) days after the disclosure of the Funded Invention to Grantee's Technology Transfer
Office or the equivalent thereof. Grantee shall promptly determine whether it desires to seek
patent or other statutory protection for all Funded Inventions promptly after each Funded
Invention is made and shall promptly inform the Society of all decisions to seek or not seek
such protection. The Society shall have the right to seek patent or other statutory protection,
at the Society's expense, for any Funded Invention in any country where Grantee has
decided not to seek protection or has failed to file an application for such protection within
six (6) months after disclosure of the Funded Invention to the Society, and, upon the
Society's request, Grantee shall file for patent protection for Funded Invention in such
countries as directed by Society at the Society's expense.
C. Grantee shall promptly notify the Society of the filing and issuance or grant of any
application for a patent or other statutory rights for a Funded Invention and shall keep the
Society reasonably informed of the status and progress of all such applications. Grantee
shall pay all costs and expenses incident to all applications for patents or other statutory
rights and all patents and other statutory rights that issue thereon owned by Grantee (other
than as provided for in Sections B or C). Grantee shall also notify the Society at least sixty
(60) days in advance of Grantee's intention to abandon any application for a patent or other
statutory right for a Funded Invention or not to take action required to maintain any such
application or any patent or other statutory right in a Funded Invention, in which event, at
the request of the Society, Grantee shall continue patent protection for Funded Invention as
directed by Society at the Society's expense (unless maintenance of such patent rights is
inconsistent with Grantee’s good name).
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
21
D. Each of the Society and Grantee (the appropriate Grantee technology transfer officer
managing Funded Invention) shall promptly inform the other of any suspected infringement
of any patent covering a Funded Invention and of any misappropriation, misuse, theft or
breach of confidence relating to other proprietary rights in a Funded Invention. Grantee and
Society will discuss in good faith further action to be taken in this regard.
E. Grantee shall notify the Society within thirty (30) days of grant of a license, lease, or other
revenue generating agreement involving a Funded Invention. In the event that Grantee fails
to license a Funded Invention within five (5) years from the issuance of a patent for the
Funded Invention and the Grantee has determined no viable means of commercialization for
Funded Invention, Grantee shall license the Funded Invention, with the right to sublicense,
to the Society (under standard Grantee license terms on a royalty free basis). However,
should the Society receive any revenue from sublicensing the Funded Invention, it will share
that revenue with Grantee on a mutually acceptable basis.
F. Grantee will license a Funded Invention in accordance with Grantee Policy and established
practices.
G. i. The Society waives the receipt of income until the Net Income from the Funded
Invention exceeds $500,000.
ii. Once the Net Income from a Funded Invention exceeds $500,000, Grantee shall pay the
Society annually a percentage of the Net Income from the Funded Invention that is
proportionate to the Society's proportion of the financial support for the research that
resulted in the Invention. Such royalty payment shall be accompanied by an
appropriate statement of account detailing the amount and showing the calculation of
Net Income received by Grantee during the preceding year. The Society shall have the
right to audit the Grantee's books and records annually, in order to verify the Net
Income derived annually from any Funded Invention.
iii. The percentage of Net Income due the Society from a Funded Invention shall be
determined by the parties within 90 days of the date the Society is notified by the
Grantee (to be extended by mutual agreement of both parties) pursuant to Section E
above of the grant of a license, lease or other revenue generating agreement involving
the Funded Invention.
If the parties are unable to agree on the percentage of Net Income payable to the Society or any
amount owed to Grantee pursuant to Paragraph E above, the dispute (the "Dispute") shall be
resolved as follows:
One of the parties shall request (the "Negotiation Request") that each of the parties appoint a
designated executive management representative to meet for the purpose of endeavoring to
resolve such Dispute. The designated executive representatives, who shall not have been directly
involved in the initial negotiations, shall discuss the Dispute and negotiate in good faith in an
effort to seek a resolution. During the course of such negotiation, all reasonable requests made
by one party to the other for information will be honored so that each of the parties may be fully
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
22
advised regarding the Dispute. If the designated executive representatives are unable to resolve
the Dispute within 30 days after the Negotiation Request, the parties shall mediate the Dispute
with a mutually acceptable mediator within the 30-day period beginning 31 days after the
Negotiation Request. If the Dispute is not resolved by mediation within 60 days after the
Negotiation Request, either party may initiate arbitration by delivering an arbitration demand to
the other party (initiator of arbitration will travel to venue of other party), and the Dispute shall
be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American
Arbitration Association ("AAA"), except that
(a) there shall be one arbitrator mutually agreed upon by both parties within 30 days after
initiation of arbitration and if the parties are unable to agree upon an arbitrator, the
arbitrator shall be appointed by AAA;
(b) neither party may submit more than 20 interrogatories, including subparts;
(c) neither party shall be entitled to take more than two depositions and no deposition shall
last more than two hours;
(d) all discovery shall be concluded within 90 days of serving the arbitration demand;
(e) each party shall bear its own costs and expenses and attorney's fees and an equal share of
the arbitrator fees and any administrative fees of the arbitrator; and
(f) arbitration shall not be utilized if Grantee is prohibited by law from submitting itself to
binding arbitration.
The award of the arbitrator shall be binding, and judgment upon the award rendered by the
arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof.
Please note that the American Cancer Society is unable to renegotiate the terms of this
agreement with any individual institution.
18. REQUEST FOR GRANT MODIFICATIONS
• Extension
A request for the extension of a grant term without additional funds must be submitted in
writing to the Scientific Director 90 days before the grant’s expiration date; a form can be
found at https://proposalcentral.com. Include an estimate of the funds to be carried over
into the extension, and an explanation for the delay—i.e. which specific aims remain
incomplete and why. In general, a grant may be extended for up to one year if a
programmatic need is justified and the funds to be carried over into the no-cost period do
not exceed an amount equivalent to one year of support (direct plus indirect costs).
• Leave of absence
Requests for a leave of absence will be handled on a case-by-case basis. Please contact
the Scientific Director at least 30 days prior to the proposed beginning of leave. An
appropriate form can be found at https://proposalcentral.com.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
23
• Request to transfer institution
A grantee who plans to change institutions during the grant period must contact the
Scientific Director to initiate the transfer request process. An appropriate form can be
found at https://proposalcentral.com.
Please note that up-to-date annual reports are required prior to approval of any grant
modifications including transfers and no-cost extensions.
The Society reserves the right to deny requests for extensions, leaves of absence, or transfers.
19. CANCELLATION OF GRANT
If a grant is to be canceled prior to the original termination date, contact your Scientific Director and
submit the Request for Cancellation form found at https://proposalcentral.com. The American
Cancer Society may cancel a grant at its sole discretion if the institution fails to comply with all
of the terms and obligations related to the grant.
In the event a grant is canceled; the institution is only entitled to the prorated amount of the
award accumulated between the start and termination dates. If a Postdoctoral Fellowship is
cancelled prior to its end date, payments of the fellowship allowance will be prorated on a
monthly basis. Please see the specific policies for Institutional Research Grants regarding the
cancellation of a pilot project grant The Society assumes no responsibility for expenditures in
excess of the prorated amount.
For Doctoral Training Grants in Oncology Social Work, Graduate Scholarships in Cancer
Nursing Practice, and Doctoral Degree Scholarships in Cancer Nursing, withdrawal from the
graduate program requires cancellation of the grant. Please see the specific policies for Master's
Training Grants in Clinical Oncology Social Work and Physician Training Awards in Cancer
Prevention for instructions regarding a student or resident who does not complete training.
If an award is canceled after the initiation of the grant period, a final report will be due within 60
days of the termination date describing the work completed up to that point.
20. RESEARCH SCHOLAR GRANTS OVERVIEW
Research Scholar Grants provide support for independent, self-directed researchers and
clinician scientists who are investigators licensed to provide patient care and trained to conduct
research. They pursue research questions across the cancer research continuum. These grants
typically cover the cost of salaries, consumable supplies, and other miscellaneous items required
in the research. Applicants must be independent, self-directed researchers or clinician scientists,
and their institution must provide space and other resources customary for independent
investigators.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
24
The application must convey the commitment of the institution to the applicant and the proposed
research activities. The Society will only recognize one principal investigator, who is responsible
and accountable for overseeing the project.
The specifications chart below provides program highlights. Note that most applicants are
beginning investigators; however, for some special funding initiatives, eligibility requirements
do not apply. More information is provided in section 21.
SPECIFICATIONS CHART: Research Scholar Grant (RSG)
Research Scholar Grants (RSG)
Eligibility Criteria Term of Award
Award Budget
RSG in Basic, Preclinical, Clinical, Epidemiology Psychosocial and Behavioral Research, and Research in Palliative Care and Symptom Management
Independent investigators within first 6 years of independent career, within a total of 12 years from the awarding of the terminal degree, and with no more than 1 current R01[-like] grant within 8 years of independent career for clinician scientists who remain active in clinical care.
4 years, non-renewable
165K per year + 20% indirect costs
RSG in the Role of Health Policy and Health Insurance in Improving Access to Care and Performance in Cancer Prevention, Early Detection, and Treatment Services
Independent investigators at any stage of their career with any level of prior funding
4 years non-renewable 5 years
165K per year + 20% indirect costs Studies in response to the RFA for insurance studies may be up to $200,000 per year (direct costs) + 20% indirect costs
RSG in Priority Program of Cancer Control: Health Equity Research (limited to Psychosocial and Behavioral Research, and Health Policy and Health Services Research)
Independent investigators at any stage of their career with any level of prior funding
4 years non-renewable Population-based studies*: Up to 5 years, non-renewable
165K per year + 20% indirect costs Population-based studies*: up to $400,000 per year (direct costs+ 20% indirect costs
* Population-based studies include those in which human subjects are recruited and longitudinally studied. Analyses
exclusively based on pre-existing datasets are not permitted. Population-based health equity studies must target 2 or
more determinates of health and also address 2 or more levels of influence.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
25
21. ELIGIBILITY RULES
Who's Eligible: Independent investigators in the first 6 years of an independent research career
or faculty appointment are eligible to apply. Eligibility is extended for 8 years for clinician
scientists who remain active in clinical care.
Exception for Cancer Control and Prevention Research: RSG applicants to ONLY the
Cancer Control and Prevention Research Program may be at any career stage provided that the
focus of their project is either: 1) Health Policy/Health Services research or 2) Achieving Cancer
Health Equity
A. INDEPENDENCE
When peer review committees evaluate an RSG applicant, they look for evidence of
administrative and scientific independence.
Administrative independence is typically demonstrated by a full-time faculty appointment
(normally equivalent to Assistant Professor); a tenure-track position; allocated office
and/or laboratory space; a start-up package; and institutional commitment defined and
verified in a letter from a department chair or equivalent.
Evidence of scientific independence could include prior grant funding and senior-author
publications. This award will be made only for project-related work that is wholly
directed by the applicant.
Specific evidence of an applicant’s independence may include:
• Degree—PhD, MD, or terminal degree in the field of specialty.
• Title/Appointment—Assistant Professor (or higher); Research Assistant Professor;
or comparable position (i.e., Assistant Member). Individuals with the rank of
Instructor may apply if that rank confers principal investigator status at their
institution.
• Training Experience—in most disciplines, applicants will have completed a period
of postdoctoral or other research training.
• Space—Committed independent research facilities.
• Publications—corresponding or senior authorship for publications in the
investigator's main area of research interest. This is desirable but not required.
• Institutional support—at least partially through hard-money, or money for start-up
or equipment.
B. TIME IN INDEPENDENT CAREER
Use the Specifications chart to determine if there is a 6-year limit on your eligibility. The
following describes how this limit is determined. For clinician scientists, the same
determinations apply except they are eligible for 8 years from the time of their initial
appointment, as long as they continue to provide patient care.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
26
How the Start Date Is Determined. At the time of application, the applicant cannot
have held an independent research position for more than 6 years. The ACS considers
applicants to have achieved independent researcher status after 6 years of postdoctoral
research training. Additional years of postdoctoral research training count toward the 6-
year limit on eligibility and the 8-year limit on eligibility for clinician scientists. Further,
an applicant must have less than 12 years of research experience beyond their terminal
degree.
Example 1: An applicant awarded a PhD in 2000, followed by 8 years of
postdoctoral training through 2008, must start their period of eligibility as an
independent researcher after 6 years of postdoctoral training, i.e., in 2006. Thus, the
period of eligibility to submit an RSG application would be from 2006 to 2012.
Example 2: An applicant awarded a PhD in 2000, followed by 3 years of
postdoctoral training who then starts an independent research position in 2003 would
be eligible to submit an RSG application from 2003 to 2009.
Example 3: An applicant awarded an MD in 2005 followed by six years of clinical
specialty and subspecialty training who then starts an independent position in 2011
would be eligible to submit through 2018 provided he continues to see patients.
Note that independent investigators at any career stage, and with any level of prior
funding, are eligible to propose population-based studies on health equity in the Cancer
Control and Prevention Program, as shown on the chart.
A career path or extenuating circumstances may merit an extension of eligibility. For instance,
the following do not count against the applicant in the determination of the eligibility time frame:
Current Windows for Eligibility
determined by start dates
If Start Date as an Independent
Researcher is On or After
Eligible to Apply for Grant
Through
October 15, 2013 October 15, 2019
April 1, 2014 April 1, 2020
October 15, 2014 October 15, 2020
April 1, 2015 April 1, 2021
October 15, 2015 October 15, 2021
April 1, 2016 April 1, 2022
October 15, 2016 October 15, 2022
April 1, 2017 April 1, 2023
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
27
• Exempt clinical training experience. Internships, residencies, and clinical fellowships
are not considered to be research training and do not count toward the limit of 12
years of research experience beyond the terminal degree.
• Leave of absence. A documented leave of absence is not counted in the 6 years of
eligibility. Leaves of absence may include military service (that does not include
research training/experience); family leave;
• Other experience. Time spent working in a non-research position (e.g., clinical,
teaching, administrative) is not counted toward eligibility. Note: work in any setting
during which time the applicant gains research experience is not exempt.
C. CURRENT GRANT SUPPORT
Using the Specifications chart, determine if current funding is an eligibility criterion.
Applicants are ineligible for an RSG if, at the time of application, they have more than
one research project award (R01 or R01-like) grant as principal investigator. R01-like is
defined as an award that is more than three years and greater than $100,000 per year in
direct costs. Training awards, career development awards, and other awards solely or
primarily for the support of the salary of the applicant (e.g., NIH K-awards) are excluded
from this definition.
Although applicants may apply for multiple awards, a grantee may not be the principal
investigator on more than one Research Scholar Grant at any time. Exceptions are made
for recipients of grants who applied in response to RFAs and for PIs of Institutional
Research Grants.
Applicants who are uncertain about their eligibility status may request a review but must do so
no later than six weeks prior to the application submission deadline (by September 1 for the
October 15 deadline; by February 15 for the April 1 deadline). A request for evaluation of
eligibility should be sent to [email protected]. Attach 1) a letter explaining your
rationale for requesting an exception to the eligibility rules and 2) a full curriculum vitae (not a
biosketch).
If your request is approved, you will receive a written correspondence confirming your
eligibility to apply; this letter should be included in the appendix to your application. Questions
may be directed to [email protected].
22. TERM AND BUDGET
Most Research Scholar Grants are funded up to $165,000 per year (direct costs), plus 20%
allowable indirect costs, with a project period of 4 years.
Population-based health equity studies may be awarded up to $400,000 per year (direct costs),
plus 20% indirect costs, with a project period of up to 5 years.
The Research Scholar Grant in the Role of Health Policy and Health Insurance in Improving
Access to Care and Performance in Cancer Prevention, Early Detection, and Treatment Services
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
28
may be funded up to $200,000 per year (direct costs), plus 20% allowable indirect costs, with a
project period of up to 5 years.
See the RFA description on cancer.org. https://www.cancer.org/research/we-fund-cancer-
research/apply-research-grant/grant-types/rfa-role-healthcare-insurance-cancer.html.
Personnel may receive salary support up to the National Institutes of Health salary cap, prorated
according to their percent effort on the project. Budgets submitted must be realistic estimates of
the funds required for the proposed research.
23. EXPENDITURES
The Society is flexible in response to the changing needs of a research program. The principal
investigator may make minor alterations (changes <$15,000/year) within the approved budget
except where such expenditures conflict with the policies of the Society.
Major changes (>$15,000 per year) require written approval from the Society. However, a
purchase of permanent equipment has a $5,000 per year threshold, beyond which written
approval is required by the Society. Contact your program director for guidance.
24. CHANGE OF INSTITUTION
Recipients of a Research Scholar Grant may transfer their grant from one institution to another
eligible institution only after receiving written approval from the Society. Grant recipients must
request a transfer as soon as a final decision for changing institutions has been made. Contact the
Program Office to alert the scientific director of your intent to transfer. Forms can be found at
https://proposalcentral.com/.
Prior to a transfer, the American Cancer Society must receive the following:
• A request for transfer in writing, indicating the anticipated transfer date;
• A statement from an administrative official at your original institution relinquishing
the grant;
• Report of Expenditures from the original institution, together with a check for any
unexpended funds.
• Research Scholar Grant transfer forms (title page, contact information page, and the
assurances and certification page of the Research Scholar Grant application form).
These must be completed by the appropriate individuals at the new institution,
indicating acceptance of the grant.
• Payments to the new institution will not be initiated until a final accounting and a
check for any unexpended funds have been received from the original institution and
the transfer has been approved by the Society. This final financial report must be
submitted within 60 days of the date the transfer was requested.
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
29
APPENDIX A: GUIDELINES FOR MAINTAINING RESEARCH AND PEER REVIEW INTEGRITY
The American Cancer Society seeks excellence in the discovery and dissemination of
knowledge regarding the cause, prevention, detection and diagnosis, treatment, survivorship and
health policy of cancer. This requires that all individuals affiliated with, or funded by, the
American Cancer Society adhere to the highest standards of professional integrity. Volunteer grant
reviewers for the American Cancer Society will also be held to the highest codes of conduct and
integrity in performing their essential function of peer review.
The American Cancer Society provides grant funds for individuals at academic and other
not-for-profit institutions to promote cancer-related training, research and treatment. This
represents a contractual relationship with such institutions, and it is an accepted responsibility and
obligation of those institutions to provide policies and procedures for their faculty, staff and
students that address possible misconduct in training, research and treatment of patients.
Moreover, it is the responsibility and obligation of faculty, students and staff engaged in scientific
research and training to be aware of policies and procedures for addressing possible misconduct at
their institutions, and to follow those procedures in reporting possible misconduct.
While questions of the integrity of applicants, grantees, and reviewers are very infrequent,
they do occur. It is the responsibility of the Program Directors managing the review process and
portfolios of funded grants and the responsibility of the Senior Vice President for Extramural
Research to ensure that all questions regarding research integrity are handled in a discrete, but
thorough manner. The actions of the Program Directors and the Senior Vice President for
Extramural Research must ensure the confidentiality and anonymity of the individual raising the
question of misconduct; ensure the integrity of the American Cancer Society and its review
processes; ensure the rights of the individual accused of misconduct; and ensure their own
credibility and integrity.
Article I
Standards and Definitions:
1.1 Research Misconduct by Applicants or Grantees
The American Cancer Society uses the following definitions related to scientific
misconduct outlined in the Federal Guidelines [Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 235, ppg. 76260-
76264].
• Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in
proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.1
• Research, as used herein, includes all basic, applied, and demonstration research in
all fields of science, engineering, and mathematics. This includes, but is not limited
to, research in economics, education, linguistics, medicine, biology, chemistry,
psychology, natural sciences, social sciences, statistics, and research involving
human subjects or animals.1
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
30
• Fabrication is defined as making up data or results and recording or reporting them.1
• Falsification is defined as manipulating research materials, equipment, or
processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not
accurately represented in the research record.1
• The research record is defined as the record of data or results that embody the facts
resulting from scientific inquiry, and includes, but is not limited to, research
proposals, laboratory records, both physical and electronic, progress reports,
abstracts, theses, oral presentations, internal reports, and journal articles.1
• Plagiarism is defined as the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes,
results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
• Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.1
• Reported Qualifications must be accurate (e.g. years since degree earned).
1.2 Research Misconduct by Peer Review Committee Members
The American Cancer Society has adopted the following definitions of misconduct in
review by members of a Peer Review Committee. Misconduct in review is defined as:
• Review for an application for which there is a clear conflict of interest between the
reviewer and applicant.
• Failure to notify ACS personnel of actual, potential, perceived or potentially
perceived conflicts of interest.
• Any communication pertaining to review related materials between a member[s] of
a peer review committee and an applicant, or the mentor of an applicant, in the case
of applications with an element of training as part of the application.
• Any communication of the unpublished content of a grant application by a member
or members of a peer review committee with any individual who is not a permanent
or ad hoc member of the peer review committee to which an application is assigned,
or who has not been approved by the Program Director for such communication.
• Any use of the unpublished content or concepts of a grant application in pursuit of
scientific or career goals by a member of a peer review committee.
• Any review of, or use of, the contents of a grant application by a member or
members of a peer review committee who might have, or be perceived to have, a
conflict of interest with the applicant or his/her mentor, in the case of applications
with an element of training as part of the application
1.3 Confidentiality Standard for Reviewers
To preserve the integrity of the peer review process, all parties involved in the review
process must adhere to the following practices regarding confidentiality and non-disclosure:
• Reviewers must not discuss applications reviewed with any individual not
designated as a part of the review process; and especially not with applicants, or
1 The above definitions are outlined in the Federal Guidelines [Federal Register, Vol.65, No.235, ppg: 76260-76264]
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
31
their mentors in the case of training grants, either before or after the peer review
meetings.
• Any inquiries to a peer review panel member regarding an application from an
applicant, PI, Co-PIs, consultants or their mentor, to a member of a Peer Review
Committee or ACS Council for Extramural Grants must be reported immediately
to the Program Director.
• All materials related to the review process must be destroyed or given to the
Program Coordinator at the end of the review meeting.
• For purposes of this standard, materials related to the review process include, but
are not limited to: paper, bound volumes, compact disks (CDs), flash-drives,
electronic files accessed via the internet, or oral presentations or discussions.
1.4 Conflict of Interest Standard for Reviewers
To preserve the integrity of the peer review process, all participants in the process must
adhere to these principles and practices:
• Reviewers must not be an employer or employee of an applicant, and may not be
employed by the same institution as an applicant within three years of the date of
submission of an application
• Reviewers must not be a party to any agreement for future employment or other
agreements or arrangements with an applicant or any person listed as key personnel
on an application
• Reviewers must not have served as mentors or collaborators of an applicant within
3 years of the date of an application
• Reviewers must not participate in the review of an application submitted by a
standing member of a Peer Review Committee serving on the same review
committee, with the exception of Health Professional Training Grants or
Institutional Research Grants
• Reviewers must not be under the health care of, or providing health care to, an
applicant or any person listed as key personnel on an application
• Reviewers must not have received or have the potential to receive direct financial
benefit from the application
• Reviewers must not be pursuing research projects which might be viewed as being
in direct competition with applicants or their collaborators and colleagues; nor have
potential to receive direct benefit from failure of the application to be funded
• Reviewers must not have any cause of action against, any dispute with, any long-
standing scientific or personal differences with, or any claim whatsoever against
the applicant or any person listed as key personnel on an application
Articles II
Policies:
2.1 Policy Governing Misconduct by Applicants and Grantees
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
32
2.1.1 Applicants:
Any allegations of scientific misconduct must be brought to the immediate attention of the
Program Director in charge of the Peer Review Committee which is responsible for reviewing the
work in question. If possible, allegations of misconduct on the part of an applicant in the
submission of a grant proposal should be raised in advance of the review meeting. The Program
Director will then bring the allegation to the attention of the Senior Vice President for Extramural
Research at ACS. The Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will evaluate the allegation
and make a determination on the misconduct issue and the appropriate next steps to be taken to
engage in further investigation or action in accordance with Article III “Procedures for Handling
Conflicts of Interest and Allegations or Findings of Misconduct in Research and Peer Review”.
2.1.2 Grantees:
In instances where alleged scientific misconduct occurs after the awarding of a grant, such
as in the publication of falsified data, the Program Director will bring the allegation to the attention
of the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research at ACS. The Senior Vice President for
Extramural Research will evaluate the allegation and make a determination of the appropriate steps
to be taken to engage in further investigation or action as defined in Article III, “Procedures for
Handling Conflicts of Interest and Allegations or Findings of Misconduct in Research and Peer
Review”.
2.2 Policy Governing Misconduct by Peer Review Committee Members
2.2.1 Confidentiality:
Confidentiality is at the heart of the peer review process and is imperative for objective
evaluation and free expression in the review process. The applicant-reviewer relationship is a
privileged alliance founded on the ethical rule of confidentiality.2 To maintain the essence and
integrity of the peer review process, the Society and its appointed peer reviewers must ensure and
be assured that the confidentiality of the applicant’s information, the contents of the grant
application, and of the proceedings of the review panel will be maintained. Such confidentiality
adheres when a person discloses information to another with the understanding that the information
will not be divulged to others without the disclosurer’s consent, or as otherwise required by law.
In the context of peer review, this rule upholds the applicants’ rights to have the information they
submit, whether in proposal form or in communications, kept confidential. The rule also ensures
that those involved in the review process maintain their obligation to keep confidential any
information concerning an application. In fact, the very existence of a submission should not be
revealed (or confirmed) to anyone other than those within the review process unless and until the
application is funded.
To this end, all contents, evaluation and discussion of applications shall be confined to Peer
Review Committee (PRC) members and ACS staff personnel (Program Director, Senior Vice
President for Extramural Research, Program Coordinator, support staff) responsible for managing
the review process of that PRC. For these purposes, reviewers include all standing and ad hoc
reviewers of PRCs and members of the Council for Extramural Grants. In rare and specific
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
33
instances, discussion of applications with, or in the presence of, non-committee members can occur
after obtaining the written consent of the Program Director. Reviewers must not discuss reviews
with applicants or their mentors in the case of training grants, either before or after the review
meetings. Reviewers also must not communicate the contents of any grant applications with
individuals not associated with the review process. Any materials related to the review process
must be disposed of at the meeting, and all final critiques given to the Program Director for
inclusion in summary statements.
If an allegation of a breach of reviewer confidentiality is brought forward, that allegation
will be communicated to the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research who will determine
if an investigation of that allegation is warranted. The Senior Vice President for Extramural
Research will then follow the appropriate steps as defined in Article III, “Procedures for Handling
Conflicts of Interest and Allegations or Findings of Misconduct in Research and Peer Review”.
2.2.2 Conflict of Interest:
An objective evaluation of grant proposals is essential to the peer review process. In
achieving this goal, there must be no conflict of interest, apparent conflict of interest or pending
future conflict of interest between any participant in the review process and the applicants or their
collaborators and colleagues. In this setting, reviewers include standing and ad hoc Peer Review
Committee (PRC) members and members of the ACS Council for Extramural Grants responsible
for, and participating in, the review process. There are numerous bases for conflicts of interest,
and these can include: employment, professional relationships, personal relationships, financial
benefit, industry affiliation or other interests. The conflicts can be real or apparent. For Definitions
of Conflict of Interest, refer to Section 1.4.
Reviewers may not make use of any of the contents of a grant for their own research
purposes or those of their collaborators and colleagues. Reviewers must exercise proper due
diligence in investigating and disclosing any potential conflict of interest that might exist between
themselves and an applicant or the applicant’s collaborators or mentors. The Conflict of Interest
Statement attached as EXHIBIT A shall be submitted to the Senior Vice President for Extramural
Research for review at least sixty (60) days prior to the beginning of the Peer Review cycle.
If an allegation of a reviewer conflict of interest is brought forward, that allegation will be
communicated to the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research who will determine if an
investigation of that allegation is warranted. The Senior Vice President for Extramural Research
will then follow the appropriate steps as defined in Article III “Procedures for Handling Conflicts
of Interest and Allegations or Findings of Misconduct”.
Article III
Procedures for Handling Conflicts of Interest and Allegations or Findings of Misconduct:
To ensure the integrity of the peer review process and the integrity of ACS-sponsored
research, it is necessary that the procedures for dealing with allegations of misconduct be clearly
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
34
understood by all reviewers and ACS personnel. Procedures for handling allegations of
misconduct by applicants, grantees and reviewers are detailed in the following sections.
3.1 Procedures for Handling an Allegation of Scientific Misconduct by Applicants or Grantees
3.1.1 Misconduct by Applicants:
In the event that an allegation of scientific misconduct by an applicant is brought forward
to a Program Director or other ACS staff, all effort must be made to investigate the validity of the
allegation while maintaining the confidentiality of the individual making the allegation, the
anonymity of the person against whom the allegation is made, and the integrity of the review
process. The Program Director must immediately inform the Senior Vice President for Extramural
Research of the allegation and provide all relevant information regarding the allegation. It is the
Senior Vice President’s responsibility to evaluate the likelihood of scientific misconduct; and, if
warranted, it is the Senior Vice President’s responsibility to contact the appropriate institutional
office at the applicant’s institution regarding the allegation. The Senior Vice President for
Extramural Research will then serve as the point of contact between the ACS and the institutional
official[s] handling issues of scientific misconduct.
If determined to be appropriate, the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will
forward an allegation of misconduct and all pertinent information to the Research Integrity Officer
at the institution sponsoring the grant application in question or at which the alleged misconduct
was carried out. If there is not a Research Integrity Officer, the Dean of the School in question or
its chief academic officer will be contacted. In the instance that the person[s] making the allegation
does not contact the American Cancer Society but raises the allegation of misconduct with the
appropriate institutional official according to their established institutional procedures, it is the
responsibility of the institution to contact the American Cancer Society regarding the allegation,
any investigation of the allegation, and the outcome of that investigation. All such correspondence
will be held in strict confidence and will not be made public by the American Cancer Society
irrespective of the outcome of the investigation. The American Cancer Society assumes no
responsibility in carrying out the investigation of scientific misconduct, or in determining an
individual’s innocence or guilt of the allegation of misconduct. However, acceptance or non-
acceptance of the findings of the institutional investigation is at the discretion of the Senior Vice
President, and additional clarification may be requested.
Allegations of scientific misconduct in a grant application may be made by individuals who
are colleagues, trainees, or reviewers. In the instance that an allegation of misconduct is made in
reference to a grant application, the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will contact
the institutional official at the sponsoring research institution and seek to follow their established
protocol for investigating such allegations. If an investigation is deemed necessary, it will be the
responsibility of the sponsoring institution to carry out the investigation, to keep the ACS aware
of the progress, and to report the outcome of the investigation to the Senior Vice President for
Extramural Research.
In fairness to the applicant, the review process must continue while the allegation of
misconduct undergoes assessment. Review may continue either in the standing review committee
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
35
or under the By-pass to Council review mechanism. Under no circumstance should a reviewer,
Program Director or ACS staff raise the issue of the allegation in a peer review meeting or meeting
of ACS Council for Extramural Grants. If that were to occur, review of that application could not
be completed without bias; and review of the application must therefore be deferred to ad hoc
reviewers or the ACS Council for Extramural Grants. If a reviewer suspects misconduct, which is
discovered at the time of the meeting, it is appropriate to request the Chair of the PRC or Council
take a "break" and discuss the issue privately with the Program Director. The Program Director
will then take the proscribed administrative steps following the adjournment of the review meeting.
The ACS will complete the process of peer review of the application but will suspend any
administrative action which would result in funding of the award in question until the resolution
of the investigation. At the conclusion of the investigation, the ACS will require the Office of
Research Integrity or comparable entity at the applicant’s sponsoring institution to provide a
written statement detailing the results of the investigation. Failure of the institution to carry out
such an investigation in a timely manner or to provide written results of the investigation will result
in the administrative disapproval of the application. If the applicant is absolved of any scientific
misconduct, the ACS will reinstitute administrative action that can result in funding for the award
if it was approved and is within the pay-line established by ACS Council for Extramural Grants.
In the instance that misconduct has occurred, the ACS will administratively inactive the
application. Also, in the case of a finding of scientific misconduct, the investigator may no longer
be eligible to participate in ACS funded awards, either as principal investigator, co-investigator,
collaborator, mentor or consultant. The investigator also may not be eligible to serve in any
capacity in reviewing ACS grant proposals.
3.1.2 Misconduct by Grantees:
In the event an allegation of scientific misconduct by a grantee is brought forward to a
Program Director or other ACS staff, all effort must be made to investigate the validity of the
allegation while maintaining the confidentiality of the individual making the allegation and the
anonymity of the person against whom the allegation is made. The Program Director or ACS staff
contacted about the alleged misconduct must immediately inform the Senior Vice President for
Extramural Research of the allegation and provide all relevant information regarding the
allegation. It is the Senior Vice President’s responsibility to evaluate the likelihood of scientific
misconduct; and, if warranted, it is the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research’s
responsibility to contact the appropriate institutional office at the applicant’s institution regarding
the allegation. The Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will then serve as the point of
contact between the ACS and the institutional official[s] handling issues of scientific misconduct.
If determined to be appropriate, the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will
forward an allegation of misconduct and all pertinent information to the Research Integrity Officer
at the institution sponsoring the grant in question or at which the alleged misconduct was carried
out. If there is not a Research Integrity Officer, the Dean of the School in question or its chief
academic officer will be contacted. In the instance that the person[s] making the allegation does
not contact the American Cancer Society but raises the allegation of misconduct with the
appropriate institutional official according to their established institutional procedures, it is the
responsibility of the institution to contact the American Cancer Society regarding the allegation,
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
36
any investigation of the allegation, and the outcome of that investigation. All such correspondence
will be held in strict confidence and will not be made public by the American Cancer Society
irrespective of the outcome of the investigation. The American Cancer Society assumes no
responsibility in carrying out the investigation of scientific misconduct, or in determining an
individual’s innocence or guilt of the allegation of misconduct. However, failure of the institution
to immediately notify ACS of an allegation and/or investigation of misconduct, or to carry out a
misconduct investigation in a timely manner, or to provide written results of the investigation, is
in non-conformance with the terms and obligations of the grant and may result in the suspension
of ACS funds for all grants awarded at the institution, to be decided by ACS in its sole discretion.
The American Cancer Society assumes no responsibility in carrying out the investigation of
scientific misconduct, or in determining an individual’s innocence or guilt of the allegation of
misconduct. However, acceptance or non-acceptance of the findings of the institutional
investigation is at the discretion of the Senior Vice President, and additional clarification may be
requested.
If the investigator has an active ACS award, funding of that award will be suspended until
the allegation has either been confirmed or be proven to be erroneous. If the allegation is proven
not to have merit, the award may be reinstituted by ACS at the date of notification of those findings
by the sponsoring institution. If the allegation of misconduct is confirmed, the award will be
terminated and any residual funds, as of the date of notification of the sponsoring institution of the
allegation, must be returned to the ACS. In the case of a finding of scientific misconduct, the
investigator may no longer be eligible to participate in ACS funded awards, either as principal
investigator, co-investigator, collaborator, mentor, or consultant. The investigator may also not be
eligible to serve in any capacity in reviewing ACS grant proposals.
The publication of data serves to further the interests of the scientific pursuit, and
specifically in the case of the ACS, the pursuit of eliminating the burden of cancer. Therefore, it
is incumbent on both the ACS and the scientific community to insure any instances of
misrepresentation of findings in a scientific study are apparent to the scientific community. To that
end, a finding of falsification or misrepresentation of data in a published forum must be reported
to the editor-in-chief of the journal in which such data is reported. It is the responsibility of the
Senior Vice President for Extramural Research to coordinate such notification with the appropriate
sponsoring institutional official according to their established policies and in conjunction with the
policies of the journal. If the sponsoring institution does not have a policy regarding notification
of the journal, then the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will notify the editor-in-
chief of the journal according to the journal’s established policies.
In the case of findings of falsification or misrepresentation of published data supported by
ACS funds, any active grant[s] held by the responsible individual will be terminated and that
individual may no longer be eligible for ACS funding via any mechanism as a principal
investigator, co-investigator, collaborator, mentor, or consultant. That individual may also not be
eligible to participate in ACS review in any capacity.
3.1.3 Reviewer Misconduct and Conflict of Interest
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
37
In the event that an allegation of reviewer misconduct, such as failure to acknowledge a
conflict of interest, is brought forward to a Program Director or other ACS staff, all effort must be
made to investigate the validity of the allegation while maintaining the confidentiality of the
individual making the allegation, the anonymity of the person against whom the allegation is made,
and the integrity of the review process. The Program Director or other ACS staff contacted
regarding the alleged misconduct must immediately inform the Senior Vice President for
Extramural Research of the allegation and provide all relevant information regarding the
allegation. It is the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research’s responsibility to evaluate the
likelihood of reviewer conflict of interest or misconduct; and, if warranted, it is the Senior Vice
President for Extramural Research’s responsibility to handle the investigation internally or to
inform the appropriate institutional office at the reviewer’s institution about the allegation if
aspects of the reviewer misconduct violate any of the tenets of professional behavior established
by that institution. The Senior Vice President for Extramural Research will then serve as the point
of contact between the ACS and the institutional official handling issues of reviewer misconduct.
Some elements of reviewer misconduct represent conduct that will only have relevance for
the appropriateness of the reviewer’s role as a member of a peer review committee. For instance,
if there is inappropriate communication between reviewer and applicant or an applicant’s mentor
or colleagues. In a case of this type, all elements of the investigation of the reviewer misconduct
will be handled by ACS personnel at the discretion of the Senior Vice President for Extramural
Research. In cases where a reviewer does not retain the confidentiality of the applicant’s
information or the content of his or her application, and makes that information available to a third
party, it will be at the discretion of the Senior Vice President for Extramural Research to handle
the issue internally at ACS or contact the Office of Research Integrity at the reviewer’s institution,
based upon an initial assessment of whether such conduct violates the rules of conduct established
by that institution. For instance, if there is communication of the contents of a grant proposal by
a reviewer to a competitor in the same field as the applicant, or if the reviewer makes use of
findings or ideas in an application to further his or her own research interests. In the instance of
such an allegation, the American Cancer Society assumes no responsibility for carrying out the
investigation of scientific misconduct, or in determining an individual’s innocence or guilt of the
allegation of misconduct. It is the institution’s responsibility to handle the misconduct according
to their established procedures. However, acceptance or non-acceptance of the findings of the
institutional investigation is at the discretion of the Senior Vice President, and additional
clarification may be requested. In any instance of a finding of reviewer misconduct, that individual
may no longer be eligible to serve in any capacity in reviewing ACS grant proposals and may be
barred from receiving any ACS grant funds.
2This section is adapted from “Confidentiality in Peer Review” (section 3.7.1). Pugh MB, ed. American Medical
Association Manual of Style: a guide for authors and editors. 9th ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1997:136-
137; and from the American Cancer Society Confidentiality, Non-Disclosure Rules and Conflict of Interest:
Information for Reviewers of Grant Applications, Version 6/3/2005
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
38
APPENDIX B: INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING DELIVERABLES
GRANT ACTIVATION FORMS
ANNUAL PROGRESS/FINAL REPORTS
TRANSFER REQUEST
CHANGE OF INSTITUTION
CHANGE OF TERM EXTENSION OF TERM
GRANT CANCELLATION
CHANGE OF PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
REPORTS OF EXPENDITURES
The American Cancer Society subscribes to the Altum proposalCENTRAL Post Award
Management System to facilitate management ACS grants. The system is designed to collect
and store grant information from grantees. Grantees are asked to keep their proposalCENTRAL
profile current for the duration of the grant.
The site will house all reports, requests and correspondence pertaining to a grant and is
accessible to both ACS program staff and grantees. Grantees may provide access to others at
their institution (e.g. grants officers) using the instructions provided below.
All awardees of an ACS grant will need to upload deliverables, and then send an email
(correspondence) to the Program Director/Program Coordinator informing the program office of
the submitted deliverables. The first deliverable we will be collecting through the Post Award
Management System is the “Activation Form.” For the Activation Form only, please also email
April Jones at [email protected] in the Research Business office notifying her that you have
uploaded your Grant Activation Form.
Uploading an Award Deliverable
- Log onto https://proposalcentral.com/
- PI must enter their proposalCentral username and password in “Applicant Login”
to access their award detail information
- Click on the Awarded link or all Proposal link
- In the Status column, click on the Award Details link
- On the Award Details screen, click on the Deliverables link at the bottom of the screen
The schedule of deliverables due for the award is shown chronologically.
- Click Save to upload the deliverable. You can replace the uploaded document with
another document by clicking Browse again, selecting a different document from your
computer files and click the Save (Adding description of deliverable is optional)
- Click Close
Research Scholar Grants Policies July 2019
39
Send Email (Correspondence) to an ACS Administrator
- To send correspondence to Program Director at the ACS, click the “Correspondence” link
from the Award Details screen
- From this page, you can see any correspondence that has already been sent by clicking on
the Blue link in the Message column
- Use the Respond link to respond directly to a message you have received
- To send a new message, click “Send Correspondence to Program Director” at the top of
the page
- Select the administrator(s) who should receive the correspondence email
- Enter a subject and text for the correspondence in the spaces provided
- Click the “Send Email” button to send the email(s) to the selected administrator
Once an application is awarded it moves from proposalCENTRAL into the Post Award
Management System. People who previously had access to your application in
proposalCENTRAL will not have access to your awarded grant in the Post Award Management
System. You may need to allow access to different users than those listed in proposalCENTRAL
to enable them to upload various reports on your behalf.
To allow to another user access to your award and to submit deliverable
- Person(s) must be a registered user on proposalCENTRAL. If they are not, ask them to
register as a new user at: https://proposalcentral.com/
- Once user is registered, from Award Detail screen click Contacts and User Access link
- Click on Manage User Access to Award at the top of the screen
- Enter and confirm email address of person
- Click on Add button
- Change the Permissions role from View to Administrator
- Click on Save button to activate access for new person
To upload other documents such as Publications, CV, etc…:
- Click the "Add Deliverable" link on the Award Deliverable screen. Select "Other" from
the drop down menu next to "Deliverable Type" from the pop up screen
- Type in the "Deliverable Description" (i.e. Publications; CV; etc.)
- Click "Browse" to upload their document
- Click "Save"
Additional information and help can be obtained through proposalCENTRAL customer support
desk:
By phone: 1-800-875-2562 toll free
By email: [email protected]
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
1
RESEARCH SCHOLAR GRANT
INSTRUCTIONS
CONTENTS
A. GENERAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 3
1. AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY (ACS) GRANT APPLICATION SYSTEM .................. 3
2. FORMAT ....................................................................................................................... 3
3. UPDATES OF INFORMATION ..................................................................................... 3
4. REQUIRED INFORMATION ......................................................................................... 4
5. GENERAL AUDIENCE SUMMARY .............................................................................. 6
6. STRUCTURED TECHNICAL ABSTRACT .................................................................... 7
7. PROJECT CODING ...................................................................................................... 7
8. ASSURANCES AND CERTIFICATION......................................................................... 7
9. PI DATA ........................................................................................................................ 8
10. RESUBMISSION ........................................................................................................... 8
11. APPLICATION SUBMISSION AND REQUIRED SIGNATURES .................................. 9
B. PREPARING THE APPLICATION .............................................................................. 10
1. COVER PAGES .......................................................................................................... 10
2. APPLICATION TEMPLATES ...................................................................................... 10
3. TABLE OF CONTENTS (PAGE 1.1) ........................................................................... 10
4. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF APPLICANT (PAGE 2.1) ............................................ 11
5. REPLY TO PREVIOUS REVIEW (PAGE 3.1) ............................................................. 11
6. PREVIOUS CRITIQUES (RESUBMISSIONS ONLY) ................................................. 11
7. RESEARCH PLAN AND ENVIRONMENT (PAGE 4.1) ............................................... 11
8. DETAILED BUDGET ................................................................................................... 16
9. JUSTIFICATION OF BUDGET .................................................................................... 18
10. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION OF KEY PERSONNEL (PAGE 5.1) ....................... 18
11. OTHER SUPPORT (PAGE 6.1) .................................................................................. 18
12. LIST OF LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM COLLABORATORS/CONSULTANTS (PAGE 7.1) .................................................................................................................. 20
13. COMPLIANCE STATEMENTS (PAGES 8.1 – 8.3) ..................................................... 20
14. STATEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT (PAGE 9.1) ....................................... 23
15. APPENDIX TO APPLICATION ................................................................................... 23
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
2
APPENDIX B: SAMPLES OF GENERAL AUDIENCE SUMMARIES ................................. 39
APPENDIX C: SAMPLE OF STRUCTURED TECHNICAL ABSTRACT ............................ 41
APPENDIX D: REVIEWER GUIDELINE CRITERIA............................................................ 42
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
3
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY (ACS) GRANT APPLICATION SYSTEM
• Access the ACS Research site at www.cancer.org.
• Select “Our Research” > “Apply for Grant” > “Grant Types”.
• Select link to your grant, which opens the electronic application process at
proposalCENTRAL.
• Follow instructions for login/register, completion, and submission.
• Key steps:
o “Create New Proposal” > “Grant Types” > “Apply Now”
o Enter Project Title (unless already displayed) > SAVE. This permits access to other
application components.
o Saved applications are stored under the “Manage Proposals”.
• See proposalCENTRAL login page for tutorials and additional details about the grant
application process.
• Alternatively, click “Help” or contact ALTUM Customer Service at [email protected]
or 1-800-875-2562.
2. FORMAT
• Insert Principal Investigator (PI) name in the header for each template of the application. Do
not change the footers on the templates.
• Application documents may be single- or double-sided (if single spacing, enter a space
between paragraphs).
• Type size: 12-point Times New Roman or 11-point Arial are the minimum font sizes for the
text; 10-point Times New Roman or 9-point Arial font type may be used for figures, legends,
and tables.
• Margins: > 0.5 inches all around, unless a form with different margins is supplied in the
Application Templates.
• Page numbering:
Number in upper right corner: Proposal Sections. They will be listed in the Table of
Contents.
Do not number: Cover pages (Signature Page, Contact Page, General Audience
Summary, Structured Technical Abstract, and Proposed Budget, if applicable) and
Appendix.
3. UPDATES OF INFORMATION
The following updates should be communicated as specified to your Scientific Director. If it is
before you have received an application number, contact the Extramural Research Department at
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
4
Withdrawal of Application: Notify the Department promptly of your intent to withdraw your
application. Include in your letter or email, the PI name, application number, and reason for
withdrawal. If the project has been funded by anot4.her organization, please list that funding
agency.
Change of Address: Notify the Department via email if a mailing address, email address, or phone
number has changed since a submission. Include the PI name and application number on the
correspondence and update your information in proposalCENTRAL.
Change of Institution: If you change institutions between application submission and peer review,
contact the Scientific Director to inquire how this may impact the review.
4. REQUIRED INFORMATION
Note: Not all fields are required for all applications; see grant-specific instructions.
Project Title: Do not exceed 75 characters including spaces; avoid abbreviations if possible.
Principal Investigator/Applicant Information: Some (or all) of the required information from
your Professional Profile may already display from your profile. If any information is outdated,
stop and update the Professional Profile before completing this section and submitting an
application. Please keep all contact information current.
Key Personnel: Individuals who contribute to the scientific development or execution of a
project in a substantive and measurable way (whether or not they receive salaries or
compensation under the grant) are considered Key Personnel. The PI is always considered Key
Personnel, but do not list them under key personnel on proposalCENTRAL.
Key Personnel can include individuals at the master’s or baccalaureate level (such as graduate
students and research assistants) if they meet this definition. “Zero percent” or “as needed” are
not acceptable levels of involvement.
The Principal Investigator assumes the authority and responsibility to direct the project. The
ACS does not permit applications to be directed by Co-Principal Investigators.
A Co-Investigator is a vital scientific contributor (at the same or a different institution), often
bringing a needed expertise to the research team. This person commits some level of measurable
effort to the project and is therefore Key Personnel, whether compensated or not.
A Collaborator plays a lesser role in the thinking and logistics of the project than a
Co-Investigator. Depending on the role and effort, a collaborator may be designated as Key
Personnel and may be compensated.
A Consultant provides expert advice, most often for a fee. Generally, a consultant is not
considered Key Personnel. However, if the consultant contributes to the scientific development
or execution of a project substantively and measurably, he or she should be designated as such.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
5
Other is defined as individuals who are compensated for their contribution to the project but are
not considered Key Personnel (e.g. student assistants, technical staff).
The table below provides information about the documents required for each personnel class.
See grant-specific instructions for detailed guidance.
REQUIRED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR NAMED PERSONNEL
Personnel Designated
“Key” Biosketch
“Other
Support”
Documentation
Included in
Budget &
Justification
Letters
Principal
Investigator Yesa Yes Yes Yes N/A
Co-
Investigator Yes Yes Yesb Yesc Letter of
Agreement/Supportb
Collaborator Yes Yes Yesb Yesc Letter of
Agreement/Supportb No No No No
Consultant Yes Yes Yesb Yesc Letter of
Agreement/Supportb No No No No
Other No No No Yes No a The PI is always considered key personnel but supporting documents should not be duplicated in the Key
Personnel section on proposalCENTRAL. b For postdoctoral fellows, technicians, and graduate students, other support documentation is not required. c If key personnel are not being paid, include ‘in kind’ for dollar amount; percent effort is required.
Some mentored and health professional training grants, such as Doctoral Scholarships in Cancer
Nursing, have other contributors (e.g., Mentor and Preceptor). See grant-specific instructions
for definitions and required supporting documents.
Citizenship Status (mandatory): On proposalCENTRAL under “Professional Profile”, indicate
your current citizenship status and country of citizenship.
Justification of Eligibility: Applicants must satisfy all eligibility requirements defined for each
application type. On the cover page, indicate when (months and year) your terminal degree was
awarded and your first independent faculty position (or equivalent), if applicable. If you have a
letter from the ACS Eligibility Committee, include it in the Appendix and Table of Contents.
Justification of Designation “Priority Focus in Health Equity Research:” Indicate on the title
page “Health Equity” if the proposal falls into the Priority Focus (Health Equity Research) in the
Cancer Control and Prevention Research Program.
Space: If applicable, indicate the approximate area of independent research space provided by
your institution to support your research program, along with the name of the department head
who can verify this commitment. You must insert a value for square footage on the electronic
form, even if that number is zero.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
6
Institutional Official: Indicate the name and address of the official authorized to sign for the
institution. Institutional officials must sign the front page; electronic signatures are acceptable.
Provide a mailing address for disbursement of funds, in the event that your grant is awarded
funding.
Department Chair: Indicate the name, department, and email address of the department head.
The department head must sign the front page to affirm the title/position of the PI and the
committed resources.
Primary Mentor: Complete all fields for mentor information (if applicable).
Additional Mentor(s): Complete all fields for additional mentor information (if applicable).
ORCID Identifier (optional): Please provide an ORCiD identifier. To add the ORCiD ID, click
Professional Profile and connect/register for an ID. Once connected, return to your proposal and
click Save.
5. GENERAL AUDIENCE SUMMARY
The general audience summary provides an overview of the proposed research for people who
are not trained in the sciences. This summary may be read by peer review stakeholders, ACS
staff members, potential donors, and the public.
• Stakeholders are individuals without formal scientific or medical training who are full
voting members of peer review panels. The stakeholder uses the general summary to evaluate
how the proposed work will benefit cancer patients and their families (i.e., the cancer
relevancy).
• ACS staff members use these summaries to identify projects that align with the specific
interests of donors and may share them with donors.
• Staff may use the summary for communicating to local media about ACS-funded studies.
Summaries of all grants funded by the Society are also made available to the public.
Therefore, do not include proprietary/confidential information.
The general audience summary should not duplicate the structured technical abstract but should
be written in an understandable way for the general public. Describe concisely the background,
significance, question(s) being asked, information to be obtained, and potential impact of your
proposed research. If symbols or Greek characters must be used, they should be spelled out to
avoid formatting problems. See examples of General Audience Summaries in the Appendix.
This form is limited to 3,000 characters including spaces and will truncate at that point. Comply
with the character limit to permit readers (including peer reviewers) to fully appreciate the “big-
picture perspective” of the proposal.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
7
6. STRUCTURED TECHNICAL ABSTRACT
Note: Not all applications require a structured technical abstract.
The structured technical abstract is a summary of the proposed research or scholarly project for
general scientific audiences (see Appendix for an example).
Organize the abstract into the following sections:
• Background
• Objective/Hypothesis
• Specific Aims
• Study Design
• Cancer Relevance
This form is limited to 3,000 characters including spaces and will truncate at that point. Comply
with the character limit to permit peer reviewers to fully appreciate the technical synopsis.
7. PROJECT CODING
Note: Project coding is not considered at peer review. Red asterisks indicate required fields; not
all grant types require project coding.
Donors often have interests in funding specific types of cancer research. Your selection of project
codes permits identification of proposals for consideration of donor-driven special funding. This
information also assists the Society in communicating our research portfolio to the public.
Select the most appropriate Areas of Research (Common Scientific Outline—CSO) and Types of
Cancer. Note that relevant items may be included under Resources and Infrastructure Related to
[specific area]. See the Appendix for specific terms and examples.
8. ASSURANCES AND CERTIFICATION
All activities involving human subjects and vertebrate animals must be approved by the
appropriate institutional committee before the application can be funded. Compliance with
current US Department of Health and Human Services and ACS guidelines for conflict of
interest, recombinant DNA, and scientific misconduct is also required. The signature of the
institutional official verifies these approval and compliance requirements.
Vertebrate animals. Every proposal involving vertebrate animals must be approved by an
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), in accordance with Public Health
Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, before the application can be
funded. Enter the date of the most recent IACUC approval in the space provided.
All research supported by the ACS (including subcontracted activities) involving vertebrate
animals must be conducted at performance sites covered under an approved Animal Welfare
Assurance. It is the responsibility of the institution to immediately report to the ACS any action,
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
8
including recertification or loss of IACUC approval, that is pertinent to the work described in the
grant application.
Human Subjects. All proposed research projects involving human subjects must be approved by
an Institutional Review Board (IRB) at an institution approved by the Office for Human
Research Protections (OHRP) of the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
Enter the institution's Assurance of Compliance number(s). Copies of the DHHS policy, assured
status, and assurance numbers may be obtained from OHRP. Definitions and further clarification
can be found at the NIH Office of Extramural Research website.
If institutional review of human or vertebrate-animal subjects has not been finalized before the
submission date of the application, you must indicate that approval is pending on the certification
page and give the appropriate institutional reference numbers, if available. Certification of the
completed review, clearly labeled with the assigned ACS application number, must be received
prior to activation of a grant. Failure to comply may result in withholding of payments and/or
cancellation of funding.
Note: Applications for the Institutional Research Grant (IRG) and some Health Professional
Training Grants do not require submission of IRB and IACUC certifications. Regardless,
institutions must comply with the requirements described above to use ACS grant funding for
activities involving human subjects or vertebrate animals.
If a grant is funded, it is the responsibility of the institution to immediately report to the ACS any
action, including recertification or loss of IRB approval, which occurs during the term of the
award that is related to the work described in the grant application.
9. PI DATA
Submit this section electronically only. The requested PI information is for statistical purposes
only and is not considered at peer review. This section will not print with the cover pages and
should not to be submitted with your paper copy.
10. RESUBMISSION
All resubmissions must create a new application on proposalCENTRAL. Applications that
are not initially funded can generally be resubmitted twice (Postdoctoral Fellowship applications
are an exception with only one resubmission). Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact the
Scientific Director prior to resubmission to discuss the previous review.
Resubmission guidelines:
• Submit a complete application with a current date for both electronic and paper copies.
• The title of the project can be altered but must be marked as a first or second resubmission.
• Select the appropriate application number from the list of your prior submissions on
proposalCENTRAL.
• The review committee code (e.g. TBE, CCE, CPPB, etc.) from the previous application must
be provided where requested on the title page.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
9
• Place a “Reply to Previous Review,” not to exceed 3 pages, where indicated in the Table of
Contents of the Application Templates section. It should clearly address all points raised in
the previous review and direct the reader to the specific sections of the text where revisions
have been made. Edits in response to the reviewers’ comments should be designated (e.g.:
bold type, highlighting, line in the margin, underlining, etc.). Reviewers’ previous critiques
should be inserted immediately after the “Reply to Previous Review” as indicated in the
Table of Contents.
11. APPLICATION SUBMISSION AND REQUIRED SIGNATURES
Applications must be submitted in two formats: an electronic version and a paper copy.
A. ELECTRONIC APPLICATION
• All application attachments, including the Appendix, must be uploaded as .pdf
documents, except for the signed copy of the front page, which is to be submitted only
with the paper copy. See proposalCENTRAL FAQ or contact support at 1-800-875-
2562 for assistance.
• Validate the application on proposalCENTRAL. An application that has not been
validated cannot be electronically submitted.
• If any modifications are made to the proposal during the signature process, make
certain the electronic and paper versions are consistent.
• Technical questions regarding the electronic application process should be directed to
Altum at https://proposalcentral.com/ or 1-800-875-2562.
• Electronic applications must be submitted on proposalCENTRAL by close of
business (5:00 PM ET) on the specified deadline date. If the deadline falls on a
weekend or holiday, applications will be accepted the following business day.
Note: After submission, you will not be able to make any changes to the forms or upload any
modifications to the files.
B. PAPER COPY
A single paper copy of the application must be received by the ACS Global Headquarters no
later than 5:00 PM (ET) on the next business day following the deadline date for the
electronic submission, shifted as needed to account for weekends or holidays.
• The paper copy must include the signatures (front page) and contact information
(second page) of the:
o Applicant
o Institutional Official
o Department Head
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
10
• Original signatures are not required; electronic signatures are acceptable. See
program-specific instructions for additional required signatures. Please confirm that
all required signatures have been collected before mailing the paper copy.
• Print application via proposalCENTRAL. (“Print” on the menu > select “Print
Signature Pages and Attached PDF Files”). Do not print cover pages for an
application before validation.
• Note that cover pages are not uploaded to proposalCENTRAL but are mailed with
your paper version.
Secure the application with a rubber band or clip rather than staples, and mail only one
application per package to:
The American Cancer Society
Extramural Research Department
250 Williams Street NW
Atlanta, GA 30303
404-329-7558
B. PREPARING THE APPLICATION
1. COVER PAGES
Complete all fields, which include mandatory signatures for the principal investigator, primary
mentor, department chair (or equivalent), and institutional official. If you have received a letter
from the ACS Eligibility Committee, indicate that in the Program Eligibility information section
and upload the correspondence in the Appendix. See Part A General Instructions for more
details.
2. APPLICATION TEMPLATES
Once an application is started on ProposalCENTRAL, all necessary application templates are
available to download. Complete off-line (described in individual sections below) and upload as
.pdf documents before submitting the online application. For assistance, see
proposalCENTRAL’s FAQ or call support at 1-800-875-2562.
3. TABLE OF CONTENTS (PAGE 1.1)
Complete the Table of Contents by indicating the appropriate page numbers for the Research
Plan section; limit the length of the Table of Contents to two pages.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
11
4. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF APPLICANT (PAGE 2.1)
Complete the NIH Biosketch template. NOTE: The Biographical Sketch may not exceed five
pages. Follow the formats and instructions provided by the NIH.
5. REPLY TO PREVIOUS REVIEW (PAGE 3.1)
IF APPLICATION IS A NEW SUBMISSION upload the provided template with “Not
Applicable” in the body.
All resubmissions must create a new application on proposalCENTRAL.
For Resubmissions:
Address the points raised in the previous critiques and direct the reviewer to the specific sections
of the text where edits have been made. Revisions should be easily identifiable in the revised
application (e.g.: bold type, italicized, or underline type). This section should not exceed 3 pages.
6. PREVIOUS CRITIQUES (RESUBMISSIONS ONLY)
Electronic copies of the critiques for your previous submission can be downloaded from your
“Submitted” page on proposalCENTRAL. Select the link to “View Review Info,” then “View
Summary Statement,” and save the document to your computer. Upload the document to your
new application with the other proposal sections.
7 A. RESEARCH PLAN AND ENVIRONMENT (PAGE 4.1)
Section A below (Specific Aims) should not exceed 1 page. Sections (B) through (F) below must
not exceed 12 pages. This page limit does not include (C) Statement of Cancer Relevance or
Sections (G) through (J).
The same proposal may be submitted to multiple funding agencies on an “either/or” basis, but
ACS proposals must conform to our guidelines (including term and budget constraints). If not, a
proposal may be returned without review.
A. Specific Aims. List the objectives and goals of your proposed research and briefly
describe the scientific aims (1 page).
B. Background and Significance. Concisely summarize and critically evaluate relevant
work done by your laboratory and others. Specifically state how the successful completion
of the work proposed will advance scientific knowledge or aspects of clinical practice that
are important for a better understanding cancer or management of cancer patients.
C. Statement of Cancer Relevance (limit to 250 words. This does not count towards the
12-page limit). This page limit does not include. This section is important to the
stakeholders (non-scientific members) on the peer review committees as well as to several
general audiences, including donors. Avoid the use of technical jargon.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
12
Describe how the project contributes short- and long-term to the control of cancer. For
basic studies relying on experimental models (rather than human cancer cells, tissues, or
clinical data) explain how the successful completion of the proposed work will lead to a
better understanding of the disease or improve our ability to prevent, detect, treat or
manage cancer or cancer patients.
For clinically relevant projects involving the etiology, diagnosis, treatment, and/or
psychosocial or behavioral aspects of cancer in humans, outline the expected contribution
of the study to controlling the overall cancer burden. This description might include an
estimate of the potential patient target population; anticipated effects on morbidity and/or
mortality; possible impact on quality of life; and the extent to which the findings may be
applicable beyond the specific aspect of cancer to be investigated.
D. Innovation
1. If applicable, explain how the application challenges and seeks to shift current
research or clinical-practice paradigms.
2. Describe any novel theoretical concepts, approaches, methodologies, instrumentation,
or intervention(s) to be developed or used, and the advantage they offer over existing
ones.
3. Explain any refinements, improvements, or new applications of theoretical concepts,
approaches, methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions.
E. Preliminary Studies. Provide results of your prior research that are relevant to this
proposal; reprints or preprints may be included in the Appendix. Note that the entire
application is considered confidential.
F. Research Design. Describe your overall hypothesis, proposed methods, procedures, and
data analysis in sufficient detail to permit evaluation by other scientists; include your
rationale for approaches and analysis. Explain your project’s feasibility and how the
experiments proposed will address the Specific Aims.
Discuss potential difficulties and limitations of your proposed methods and provide
alternative approaches. Inclusion of an experimental time-line can be helpful.
G. Experimental Details (optional – not to exceed 3 pages). This section is available if more
in-depth description of the experimental design, technologies, or assays are needed to
convey the specific approaches and procedures proposed.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
13
H. Environment. Describe the space and equipment available to conduct the proposed
research (e.g., space designated specifically for your research program, shared space
and/or core facilities). The required signature on the cover page by the Department Chair
or equivalent verifies an institutional commitment of described research facilities. A
detailed description of space and equipment is especially important for non–tenure-track
applicants.
I. Statement of Science Outreach and Advocacy (not to exceed 1 page). The ACS
considers it important that scientists communicate the results of their research to a wide
range of communities. Explain the potential impact of your proposed project on your
community, and to the ACS’s mission of eliminating cancer as a major health problem.
Share any previous experiences in science outreach and advocacy. Describe your future
plans for disseminating your work in the cancer arena through advocacy, awareness,
education, or service. Please include your plans for sharing your research and findings
with your non-academic community members and for engaging with community partners
in the dissemination process.
J. References. Each literature citation should include title, authors, book or journal, volume
number, page numbers, and year of publication. There is no page limitation; this section is
not included in the 12-page limit of Sections (A) through (F).
7 B. RESEARCH PLAN AND ENVIRONMENT – RFA – (RSGI) - ACCESS TO CARE
- THE ROLE OF HEALTHCARE AND INSURANCE IN IMPROVING OUTCOMES IN
CANCER PREVENTION, EARLY DETECTION, AND TREATMENT (PAGE 4.1)
All cancer health-equity applications must target two or more social determinants of health.
Population-based health equity studies must also target two or more levels of influence
(individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, or public policy) and focus on achieving
health equity. Applicants are at liberty to use more than one model to describe the theoretical
underpinning of their research approach.
Section A below (Specific Aims) should not exceed 1 page. Sections (B) through (F) below must
not exceed 12 pages. This page limit does not include (C) Statement of Cancer Relevance or
Sections (G) through (J).
A. Specific Aims. List the objectives and goal(s) of the research proposed and briefly
describe the Specific Aims in the context of 1 or more of the 4 As of responsible health
care reform (availability, affordability, adequacy, administrative simplicity).
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
14
B. Background and Significance. Concisely summarize and critically evaluate related work
pertaining to access to cancer prevention, diagnostic, treatment, or palliative care services.
State how the successful completion of the proposed work will advance health policy
knowledge, scientific knowledge, or aspects of clinical practice that are important for
better understanding the impact of health policy and/or access to care on cancer patients
or patients seeking cancer preventive services.
C. Statement of Cancer Relevance. This section is important to Stakeholders (non-
scientific members) on the peer review committees and to a number of general audiences,
including donors. Technical terminology should be avoided. Describe the short- and long-
term contributions to the control of cancer.
For studies not directly involving human subjects, explain how the results to be obtained
will lead to a better understanding of how health policy impacts cancer prevention,
detection, diagnosis, treatment, or palliative/supportive care.
For studies involving human subjects, what do you expect to learn about how access to
care impacts the overall cancer burden? How could your study improve both delivery of
care and cancer outcomes? What effects do you anticipate on the morbidity, mortality,
and/or quality of life of your study population? How might further investigations find
potential value for health policy? This section must not exceed 250 words.
D. Innovation.
1. Explain how the application challenges and seeks to shift current policy, research, or
clinical practice paradigms.
2. Describe any novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies,
instrumentation or intervention(s) to be developed or used, and any advantage over
existing methodologies, instrumentation, or intervention(s).
3. Explain any refinements, improvements, or new applications of theoretical concepts,
approaches or methodologies, instrumentation or interventions.
4. If applicable, explain what is unique in your approach to address an important
element of access to care and/or health equity in the context of 1 or more of the 4As
of responsible health care reform. Describe how this innovation been enhanced by
community or public policy partnerships.
E. Preliminary Studies. Provide results of your prior research that are relevant to this
proposal; reprints or preprints may be included in the Appendix. Note that the entire
application is considered confidential, including reports of unpublished research.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
15
F. Research Design. Describe your overall hypothesis, proposed methods, procedures, and
data analysis in sufficient detail to permit evaluation by other scientists; include your
rationale for approaches and analysis. Explain your project’s feasibility and how the
experiments proposed will address the Specific Aims.
Discuss potential difficulties and limitations of your proposed methods and provide
alternative approaches. Inclusion of an experimental time-line can be helpful.
G. Potential for Knowledge Transfer and Experimental Details (3 pages or less).
Potential for Knowledge transfer: Create a clearly defined plan of how the results of the
study will be used to develop future research and how it will practically impact local,
regional, or national policy; clinical practice; and/or patient interactions with health
systems. Concisely describe how the findings will be disseminated. Describe potential
application of study findings to the work of ACS CAN.
Experimental Details (optional – not to exceed 3 pages). This section is available if more
in-depth description of the experimental design, technologies or assays are needed to
convey to reviewers the applicant’s understanding of the specific approaches and
procedures proposed.
H. Environment. Describe briefly the space and equipment available to carry out the
proposed research. Investigators must have an institutional commitment of research
facilities, and the amount of committed space must be verified by the Department Chair or
equivalent (signature required on cover page). This section is required and important for
all non–tenure-track applicants.
I. Statement of Science Outreach and Advocacy (not to exceed 1 page). The ACS
considers it important that scientists communicate the results of their research to a wide
range of communities. Explain the potential impact of your proposed project on your
community, and to the American Cancer Society’s mission of eliminating cancer as a
major health problem. Share any previous experiences in science outreach and advocacy.
Describe your future plans for disseminating your work in the cancer arena through
advocacy, awareness, education, or service. Please include your plans for sharing your
research and findings with your non-academic community members and for engaging
with community partners in the dissemination process.
J. References. Each literature citation should include title, authors, book or journal, volume
number, page numbers, and year of publication. There is no page limitation; this section is
not included in the 12-page limit of sections A-F).
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
16
8. DETAILED BUDGET
Complete the budget page located online at proposalCENTRAL
A. Personnel. Names and positions of all key personnel must be individually listed and the
percentage of time to be devoted to the project by each person should be noted. List all
key personnel other than the PI (defined as individuals who will participate actively in the
design and/or execution of the studies). Details of contractual arrangements with key
personnel should be provided in the Justification of Budget section of the application.
If the individual has not been selected, please list as "vacancy.” Personnel may receive
salary support up to a maximum that equals the NIH salary cap, prorated according to
their percent effort on the project.
The costs to the institution of employee fringe benefits should be indicated as a percent of
the employee's salary. The amount of fringe benefits requested must be prorated to the
salary requested. (For example, if 50 percent of an individual's annual salary is requested
then no more than 50 percent of that individual's annual cost for fringe benefits can be
requested.)
Please Note: For definitions of key personnel refer to section 4. Required Information is
on page 3.
B. Equipment.
• Permanent equipment - Defined as items of nonexpendable property with a purchase
cost per unit that equals or exceeds $5,000 with a useful life of more than one year.
List separately and justify the need for each item of permanent equipment. Note: the
cost of permanent equipment is not included in the Direct Cost total used to calculate
Indirect Costs.
• Small or expendable equipment is defined as expendable property with a purchase
cost per unit less than $5,000 with a service life of less than 1 year). Note: the cost of
small or expendable equipment may be included in the Direct Cost total used to
calculate Indirect Costs.
• General purpose equipment - Equipment such as computers used primarily or
exclusively in the actual conduct of the proposed scientific project are considered
direct cost and may be included in the Direct Cost total used to calculate Indirect
Costs. Computers or other general-purpose equipment that will be used on multiple
projects or for personal use should not be listed as a direct cost and should not be
included in the calculation for indirect cost.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
17
C. Supplies. Group supplies into major categories (glassware, chemicals, radioisotopes,
survey materials, animals, etc.).
D. Travel. Domestic travel only: special consideration will be given for attendance at
scientific meetings held in Canada.
E. Miscellaneous Expenditures. List specific amounts for each item. Examples of allowed
expenditures include publication costs and special fees (e.g., publication costs, pathology,
computer time and scientific software, and equipment maintenance).
F. Subcontracts. If any portion of the proposed research is to be carried out at another
institution, enter the total costs (direct) on to the online budget detail page on
proposalCentral. Then provide a categorical breakdown of costs using the Subcontractor
Budget and Justification form, using one form per subcontractor. Upload the form(s) when
complete, entering subcontractor name in the “describe attachment” field. Note: indirect
costs for the subcontract budget may be claimed by either the primary or the secondary
institution, but not both.
Subcontracts for the research project may be with public or private institutions, provided
they do not violate ACS policies. Subcontracts involving a contractor residing outside
the borders of the United States are not permitted, unless the applicant can document
that it is not feasible to have the work performed within the United States. Use of any
subcontractor outside of the United States must be approved in writing by ACS prior to
the performance of any work funded by the ACS grant.
Administrative pages: A Letter of Agreement pertaining to the subcontract should be
included in the Appendix.
G. Indirect Costs. To help the institution provide proper laboratory and clinical facilities, the
Society will permit an indirect cost allowance of up to 20% of the direct costs, excluding
permanent equipment. Indirect costs for a subcontract budget may be claimed by either
the primary or the secondary institution, but not both. Indirect costs can be provided to the
secondary institution through negotiation with the Principal Investigator’s institution but
the total amount of indirect costs, inclusive of subcontracts, may not exceed 20% of the
award.
H. Total Amount Requested. Budget totals should reflect a maximum duration of 4 years,
unless the application is submitted as a population-based health equity study, in which
case the applicant is allowed a maximum of 5 years. Applicants must provide a strong
rationale, preliminary data, and suitable approach that demonstrate expertise in
conducting large population-based studies and justify the proposed time and budget.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
18
The Society and its peer review committees expect applicants to show judicious use of
proposed funds in all grant applications. Enter the sum of all years of requested support,
including indirect costs, and round to the nearest thousand dollars. Transfer this figure to
the title page of the online application.
9. JUSTIFICATION OF BUDGET
Provide budget justification on the template provided. Justify all items of permanent equipment
costing over $5,000, as well as your needs for personnel, supplies, travel, and other
miscellaneous items. If the budget includes a request for funds to be spent outside the United
States or its territories, explain why these funds are essential to the successful conduct of the
project, and why there are no alternatives. Provide details of contractual arrangements with key
personnel in this section.
10. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION OF KEY PERSONNEL (PAGE 5.1)
Provide information for all key personnel involved in the project. Complete the NIH Biosketch
template. NOTE: Follow the format and instructions provided by NIH.
11. OTHER SUPPORT (PAGE 6.1)
The American Cancer Society does not fund projects that are supported all or in part by another
agency. Projects are considered to overlap if there are any shared Specific Aims or areas of
budgetary overlap. The peer review committees make final decisions regarding any questions of
overlap.
The only exceptions are:
• funds provided by the institution as start-up support to develop a new laboratory or to
gather pilot data; and
• awards that provide only salary support for the Principal Investigator. In the latter case, if
the salary support for the PI’s contribution to the project is covered by the other agency,
no additional salary support for the PI may be requested from the American Cancer
Society.
Provide the following information separately for the Principal Investigator and all other Key
Personnel:
1. Current Support. List all current funding from intramural and extramural sources
(e.g., institutional awards and grants from for-profit and not-for-profit agencies,
including other grants from the American Cancer Society). Provide for each award:
a. Source of funds: the organization providing the support
b. Grant number
c. Project title
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
19
d. Inclusive dates of approved or proposed project. For example, in the case of
NIH support, provide the dates of the approved or proposed competitive
segment.
e. Total direct costs
f. Percent effort or person-months. For an active project, use person months,
even if unsalaried, for the current budget period. Classify person-months as
academic, calendar, and/or summer.
g. An outline of the goals of the project in a brief paragraph.
h. A clear indication of overlap and differences between this grant and the
proposed study. If necessary, include an explanatory letter in the Appendix.
2. Pending Support. List all pending applications for funding from intramural and
extramural sources (e.g., institutional awards and grants from for-profit and not-for-
profit agencies, including other grants from the American Cancer Society). Provide
for each award:
a. Source of funds: the organization providing the support
b. Project title
c. Inclusive dates of approved or proposed project. For example, in the case of
NIH support, provide the dates of the approved or proposed competitive
segment.
d. Total direct costs
e. Percent effort or person-months. For an active project, use person months,
even if unsalaried, for the current budget period. Classify person-months as
academic, calendar, and/or summer.
f. An outline of the goals of the project in a brief paragraph.
g. A clear indication of overlap and differences between this grant and the
proposed study. If necessary, include an explanatory letter in the appendix. In
such cases, you may accept only 1 award if both are approved for funding.
Specific Aims Specific Aims
Please keep the Scientific Director current on the status of pending applications
that have scientific overlap, would interfere with the PI’s budgeted effort on the
ACS proposal, or could compromise RSG eligibility (i.e., more than one RO1 or
RO1-like grant as PI at the time of application).
3. Institutional Support. Provide the following information for the Principal Investigator
only:
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
20
a. A description of any start-up funds provided by the institution to the applicant.
An award of start-up funds does not decrease the likelihood of ACS support,
and can be important evidence of institutional commitment.
b. Details of the institutional commitment to support the applicant’s salary.
c. The current term of the applicant’s appointment.
These details should be confirmed by the Department Chair in the Statement of
Institutional Support included in Section 14, below.
Applicants not on tenure track should also include a more detailed description of the
space committed to the project. If the applicant is in the same department as a
previous mentor, provide information on the relationship between the mentor’s
research space, and the space available for the project; and the relationship between
funded research projects in the mentor’s laboratory and the present application.
Documentation should be included in the Statement of Institutional Support (Section
13, below) written by the Department Chair.
12. LIST OF LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM COLLABORATORS/CONSULTANTS
(PAGE 7.1)
Provide a list of collaborators and consultants. Then directly upload the letter from each
individual collaborator or consultant after page 7.1. The letter should outline the role that person
will play with sufficient detail for evaluation of the value of the individual contribution.
13. COMPLIANCE STATEMENTS (PAGES 8.1 – 8.3)
Human Subjects
Selection of study population. When conducting research on humans, provide the rationale for
selecting your target population. Include the involvement of children, minorities, and especially
vulnerable populations such as neonates, pregnant women, prisoners, institutionalized
individuals, or Specific Aims. IRB approval is required prior to activation of a grant.
On the planned enrollment form estimate the total number of subjects by primary ethnicity and
race, race/ethnicity subgroup (if applicable), and gender. Include a rationale for excluding any
population. Estimate the planned enrollment based on these calculations.
Also include estimates of the sample distribution by gender, race, and ethnicity (if available). For
example, if your sample size is 200, to complete the total number of subjects column by race
(based on what you know about the population demographics or the existing dataset you plan to
analyze), multiple by the estimated percentage.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
21
Estimated percentage of the
population by race
Estimated total number of
subjects
50% White 100 (200 x 0.50)
49% AA 98 (200 x 0.49)
1% Asian 2 (200 x 0.01)
For applicants performing research with non-human subjects, check the box that most
appropriately describes your research.
Potential benefits, risks, and knowledge gained. Succinctly describe the potential benefits and
risks to subjects (physical, psychological, financial, legal, or other). Explain why the risks are
reasonable in relation to the anticipated benefits, both to research participants and others. Where
appropriate, describe alternative treatments and procedures, including the risks and potential
benefits to participants of those.
Research Specimens and Data. If the proposed research involves bio-specimens, explain how
the research material will be obtained from living subjects and what materials will be collected.
List any specific non-biological data, such as demographic information, and how it will be
collected, managed, and protected. Specify who will have access to such data and what measures
you will maintain to keep personally identifiable private information confidential.
Collaborating sites. List any collaborating sites where research on human subjects will be
performed and describe the role of those sites and collaborating investigators in performing the
proposed research. Explain how data from the site(s) will be obtained, managed, and protected.
*For additional protections for vulnerable populations, see
http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/populations/index.html.
Vertebrate Animals
Provide your rationale for using live vertebrate animals including the:
1. Necessity for using the animals and species proposed;
2. Appropriateness of the strains, ages, genders of the animals to be used;
3. Justifications for, and appropriateness of, the numbers of animals proposed. When
completing the Targeted Enrollment Table, select non-human subjects research and
check the box that most appropriately describes your research.
Biohazards
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
22
Briefly describe whether any materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to
research personnel, equipment, and/or the environment. What protections will mitigate such
risks? Include biological or chemical hazards.
Authentication of Key Biological and/or Chemical Resources
Briefly describe methods to ensure the identity and validity of key biological and/or chemical
resources to be used in the proposed studies. These resources may or may not be generated with
ACS funds and:
• may differ from laboratory to laboratory or over time;
• may have qualities and/or qualifications that could influence the research data; and
• must be integral to the proposed research.
These may include, but are not limited to, cell lines, specialty chemicals, antibodies, and other
biologics. Researchers should transparently report how they have authenticated key resources, so
consensus can emerge.
Standard laboratory reagents that are not expected to vary need not be included in the plan (e.g.
buffers and other common biologicals or chemicals). After reviewers assess the information you
provide in this Section, their questions will need to be addressed prior to an award.
In this section, focus only on authentication and/or validation of key resources to be used in the
study. Include all other information within the page limits of the research strategy. Applications
that fail to comply may be dismissed.
Priority Focus on Health-Equity Research in the Cancer Control and Prevention Research
Grants Program (750 word limit)
Applicants proposing health-equity research must upload a Cancer Control and Prevention
Health Equity Statement (page 8.3). In it, summarize the targeted area(s) of health equity, study
population, and how the proposed research can contribute to improving health equity relevant to
cancer.
How will your anticipated findings advance the field? This must pertain to an aspect of the
cancer continuum and one or more of the social determinants of health (see Priority Area
Focused on Health Equity description at https://www.cancer.org/research/we-fund-cancer-
research/apply-research-grant/grant-types/rfa-role-healthcare-insurance-cancer.html).
Examples of research in this area include, but are not limited to, improvements in:
• risk reduction behaviors;
• access to cancer prevention;
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
23
• early detection, diagnosis, and/or treatment services;
• reducing cancer morbidity, mortality, symptom burden, or costs; and
• quality of care, quality of life, or health policy impact.
14. STATEMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT (PAGE 9.1)
Include letter from the Department Chair or equivalent that clearly indicates the institution’s
commitment to support the applicant and their research program. Details should include salary
support, dedicated space, startup funds, and others as appropriate. Clinician scientists should
include a description of their clinical practice (discipline and clinical responsibilities) as well as
the amount of protected time.
The letter should also describe the Department’s long-term goals for the applicant’s career.
15. APPENDIX TO APPLICATION
In addition to the application templates, other key documents may be uploaded and submitted as
part of the application. However, applicants are urged to keep this section as brief as possible.
Appended materials may include:
• Letter from ACS Eligibility Committee confirming eligibility (if applicable)
• Recent reprints or preprints (optional)
• Clinical protocols (if applicable)
• Logic model for program projects and dissemination and implementation pilots (if
applicable)
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
24
APPENDIX A: CLASSIFICATION CATEGORIES - AREAS OF RESEARCH
The areas of research are based on seven broad categories called the Common Scientific
Outline (CSO) developed by the International Cancer Research Partnership (ICRP):
1. Biology
2. Etiology
3. Prevention
4. Early Detection, Diagnosis and Prognosis
5. Treatment
6. Cancer Control, Survivorship and Outcomes Research
Applicants are asked to select from the following codes:
1 – BIOLOGY
Research included in this category looks at the biology of how cancer starts and progresses
as well as normal biology relevant to these processes.
1.1 Normal Functioning
Examples of science that would fit:
• Developmental biology (from conception to adulthood) and the biology of aging
• Normal functioning of genes, including their identification and expression, and the
normal function of gene products, such as hormones and growth factors
• Normal formation of the extracellular matrix
• Normal cell-to-cell interactions
• Normal functioning of apoptotic pathways
• Characterization of pluripotent progenitor cells (e.g., normal stem cells)
1.2 Cancer Initiation: Alterations in Chromosomes
Examples of science that would fit:
• Abnormal chromosome number
• Aberration in chromosomes and genes (e.g., in chronic myelogenous leukemia)
• Damage to chromosomes and mutation in genes
• Failures in DNA repair
• Aberrant gene expression
• Epigenetics
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
25
• Genes and proteins involved in aberrant cell cycles
1.3 Cancer Initiation: Oncogenes and Tumor Suppressor Genes
Examples of science that would fit:
• Genes and signals involved in growth stimulation or repression, including oncogenes
(Ras, etc.), and tumor suppressor genes (p53, etc.)
• Effects of hormones and growth factors and their receptors such as estrogens,
androgens, TGF-beta, GM-CSF, etc.
• Research into the biology of stem cell tumour initiation
1.4 Cancer Progression and Metastasis
Examples of science that would fit:
• Latency, promotion, and regression
• Expansion of malignant cells
• Interaction of malignant cells with the immune system or extracellular matrix
• Cell mobility, including detachment, motility, and migration in the circulation
• Invasion
• Malignant cells in the circulation, including penetration of the vascular system and
extravasation
• Systemic and cellular effects of malignancy
• Tumor angiogenesis and growth of metastases
• Role of hormone or growth factor dependence/independence in cancer progression
• Research into cancer stem cells supporting or maintaining cancer progression
1.5 Resources and Infrastructure
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informatics and informatics networks
• Specimen resources
• Epidemiological resources pertaining to biology
• Reagents, chemical standards
• Development and characterization of new model systems for biology, distribution of
models to scientific community or research into novel ways of applying model systems,
including but not limited to computer-simulation systems, software development, in
vitro/cell culture models, organ/tissue models or animal model systems. Guidance note:
this should only be used where the focus of the award is creating a model. If it is only a
tool or a methodology, code to the research instead.
• Education and training of investigators at all levels (including clinicians and other health
professionals), such as participation in training workshops, conferences, advanced
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
26
research technique courses, and Master's course attendance. This does not include
longer-term research-based training, such as Ph.D. or post-doctoral fellowships.
2 – ETIOLOGY
Research included in this category aims to identify the causes or origins of cancer - genetic,
environmental, and lifestyle, and the interactions between these factors.
2.1 Exogenous Factors in the Origin and Cause of Cancer
Examples of science that would fit:
• Research into the role of lifestyle factors such as smoking, chewing tobacco, alcohol
consumption, parity, diet, sunbathing, and exercise in the origin and cause of cancer or
increasing the risk of cancer
• Research into the social determinants of cancer such as crime, housing dilapidation,
neighbourhood level socioeconomic status and services and their relationship to cancer
incidence and mortality etc.
• Studies on the effect(s) of nutrients or nutritional status on cancer incidence
• Development, characterization, validation, and use of dietary/nutritional assessment
instruments in epidemiological studies and to evaluate cancer risk
• Environmental and occupational exposures such as radiation, second-hand smoke,
radon, asbestos, organic vapors, pesticides, and other chemical or physical agents
• Infectious agents associated with cancer etiology, including viruses (Human Papilloma
Virus-HPV, etc.) and bacteria (helicobacter pylori, etc.)
• Viral oncogenes and viral regulatory genes associated with cancer causation
• Contextual Factors Contributing to Cancer Incidence (e.g., race/ethnicity, socioeconomic
status, neighborhood factors, community factors, built environment).
2.2 Endogenous Factors in the Origin and Cause of Cancer
Examples of science that would fit:
• Free radicals such as superoxide and hydroxide radicals
• Identification /confirmation of genes suspected of being mechanistically involved in
familial cancer syndromes; for example, BRCA1, Ataxia Telangiectasia, and APC
• Identification/confirmation of genes suspected or known to be involved in ""sporadic""
cancer events; for example, polymorphisms and/or mutations that may affect
carcinogen metabolism (e.g., CYP, NAT, glutathione transferase, etc.)
• Investigating a role for stem cells in the etiology of tumours
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
27
2.3 Interactions of Genes and/or Genetic Polymorphisms with Exogenous and/or Endogenous
Factors
Examples of science that would fit:
• Gene-environment interactions
• Interactions of genes with lifestyle factors, environmental, and/or occupational
exposures such as variations in carcinogen metabolism associated with genetic
polymorphisms
• Interactions of genes and endogenous factors such as DNA repair deficiencies and
endogenous DNA damaging agents such as oxygen radicals or exogenous radiation
exposure
2.4 Resources and Infrastructure Related to Etiology
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informatics and informatics networks; for example, patient databanks
• Specimen resources (serum, tissue, etc.)
• Reagents and chemical standards
• Epidemiological resources pertaining to etiology
• Statistical methodology or biostatistical methods
• Centers, consortia, and/or networks
• Development, characterization and validation of new model systems for etiology,
distribution of models to the scientific community or research into novel ways of
applying model systems, including but not limited to computer-simulation systems,
software development, in vitro/cell culture models, organ/tissue models or animal
model systems. Guidance note: this should only be used where the focus of the award is
creating a model. If it is only a tool or a methodology, code to the research instead.
• Education and training of investigators at all levels (including clinicians and other health
professionals), such as participation in training workshops, conferences, advanced
research technique courses, and Master's course attendance. This does not include
longer term research based training, such as Ph.D. or post-doctoral fellowships.
3 – PREVENTION
Research included in this category looks at identifying individual and population-based
primary prevention interventions, which reduce cancer risk by reducing exposure to cancer
risks and increasing protective factors.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
28
3.1 Interventions to Prevent Cancer: Personal Behaviors (Non-Dietary) that Affect Cancer Risk
Examples of science that would fit:
• Research on determinants of personal behaviors, such as physical activity, sun exposure,
and tobacco use, known to affect cancer risk and interventions (including educational
and behavioral interventions directed at individuals as well as population-based
interventions including social marketing campaigns, environmental supports, and
regulatory, policy and legislative changes) to change determinants
• Directed education to specified populations of patients, health care providers, and at-
risk groups about cancer risk and prevention and relevant interventions with the intent
of promoting increased awareness and behavioral change. This includes communication
of lifestyle models that reduce cancer risk, such as communicating smoking and tobacco
cessation interventions
3.2 Dietary Interventions to Reduce Cancer Risk and Nutritional Science in Cancer Prevention
Examples of science that would fit:
• Quantification of nutrients, micronutrients, and purified nutritional compounds in
cancer prevention studies
• Development, characterization, validation, and use of dietary/nutritional assessment
instruments to evaluate cancer prevention interventions
• Research on determinants of dietary behavior and interventions to change diet
(including educational and behavioral interventions directed at individuals as well as
population-based interventions including social marketing campaigns, environmental
supports, and regulatory and legislative changes) to change diet
• Education of patients, health care providers, at-risk populations, and the general
population about cancer risk and diet
• Communicating cancer risk of diet to underserved populations, at-risk populations, and
the general public
• Communication of nutritional interventions that reduce cancer risk"
3.3 Chemoprevention
Examples of science that would fit:
• Chemopreventive agents and their discovery, mechanism of action, development,
testing in model systems, and clinical testing
3.4 Vaccines
Examples of science that would fit:
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
29
• Vaccines for prevention, their discovery, mechanism of action, development, testing in
model systems, and clinical testing (e.g., HPV vaccines)
• Guidance note: only preventive/prophylactic vaccine research should be included here.
Vaccines for the treatment of cancer should be coded to 5.3 or 5.4, depending on the
phase of development.
3.5 Complementary and Alternative Prevention Approaches
Examples of science that would fit:
• Discovery, development, and testing of complementary/alternative medicine (CAM)
approaches or other primary prevention interventions that are not widely used in
conventional medicine or are being applied in different ways as compared to
conventional medical uses
• Mind and body medicine (e.g., meditation, acupuncture, hypnotherapy), manipulative
and body-based practices (e.g., spinal manipulation, massage therapy), and other
practices (e.g., light therapy, traditional healing) used as a preventive measure.
3.6 Resources and Infrastructure Related to Prevention
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informatics and informatics networks; for example, patient databanks
• Specimen resources (serum, tissue, etc.)
• Epidemiological resources pertaining to prevention
• Clinical trials infrastructure
• Statistical methodology or biostatistical methods
• Centers, consortia, and/or networks
• Development and characterization of new model systems for prevention, distribution of
models to scientific community or research into novel ways of applying model systems,
including but not limited to computer-simulation systems, software development, in
vitro/cell culture models, organ/tissue models or animal model systems. Guidance note:
this should only be used where the focus of the award is creating a model. If it is only a
tool or a methodology, code to the research instead.
• Education and training of investigators at all levels (including clinicians and other health
professionals), such as participation in training workshops, conferences, advanced
research technique courses, and Master's course attendance. This does not include
longer term research based training, such as Ph.D. or post-doctoral fellowships.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
30
4 – EARLY DETECTION, DIAGNOSIS, AND PROGNOSIS
Research included in this category focuses on identifying and testing cancer markers and
imaging methods that are helpful in detecting and/or diagnosing cancer as well as predicting
the outcome or chance of recurrence or to support treatment decision making in
stratified/personalised medicine.
4.1 Technology Development and/or Marker Discovery
Examples of science that would fit:
• Discovery or identification and characterization of markers (e.g., proteins, genes,
epigenetic), and/or technologies (such as fluorescence, nanotechnology, etc.) that are
potential candidates for use in cancer detection, staging, diagnosis, and/or prognosis
• Use of proteomics, genomics, expression assays, or other technologies in the discovery
or identification of markers
• Defining molecular signatures of cancer cells, including cancer stem cells (e.g., for the
purposes of diagnosis/prognosis and to enable treatment decision planning in
personalized/stratified/precision medicine)
4.2 Technology and/or Marker Evaluation With Respect to Fundamental Parameters of
Method
Examples of science that would fit:
Development, refinement, and preliminary evaluation (e.g., animal trials, preclinical, and Phase
I human trials) of identified markers or technologies such as genetic/protein biomarkers
(prospective or retrospective) or imaging methods (optical probes, PET, MRI, etc.)
• Preliminary evaluation with respect to laboratory sensitivity, laboratory specificity,
reproducibility, and accuracy
• Retrospective studies of existing sample collections and evaluation of markers in
ancillary studies
• Research into mechanisms assessing tumor response to therapy at a molecular or
cellular level
4.3 Technology and/or Marker Testing in a Clinical Setting
Examples of science that would fit:
• Evaluation of clinical sensitivity, clinical specificity, and predictive value (Phase II or III
clinical trials)
• Quality assurance and quality control
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
31
• Inter- and intra-laboratory reproducibility
• Testing of the method with respect to effects on morbidity and/or mortality
• Study of screening methods, including compliance, acceptability to potential screenees,
and receiver-operator characteristics. Includes education, communication, behavioral
and complementary/alternative approaches to improve compliance, acceptability or to
reduce anxiety/discomfort.
• Research into improvements in techniques to assess clinical response to therapy
4.4 Resources and Infrastructure Related to Detection, Diagnosis, or Prognosis
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informatics and informatics networks; for example, patient databanks
• Specimen resources (serum, tissue, images, etc.)
• Clinical trials infrastructure
• Epidemiological resources pertaining to risk assessment, detection, diagnosis, or
prognosis
• Statistical methodology or biostatistical methods
• Centers, consortia, and/or networks
• Development, characterization and validation of new model systems for detection,
diagnosis or prognosis, distribution of models to the scientific community or research
into novel ways of applying model systems, including but not limited to computer-
simulation systems, software development, in vitro/cell culture models, organ/tissue
models or animal model systems. Guidance note: this should only be used where the
focus of the award is creating a model. If it is only a tool or a methodology, code to the
research instead.
• Education and training of investigators at all levels (including clinicians and other health
professionals), such as participation in training workshops, conferences, advanced
research technique courses, and Master's course attendance. This does not include
longer term research based training, such as Ph.D. or post-doctoral fellowships.
5 – TREATMENT
Research included in this category focuses on identifying and testing treatments
administered locally (such as radiotherapy and surgery) and systemically (treatments like
chemotherapy which are administered throughout the body) as well as non-traditional
(complementary/alternative) treatments (such as supplements, herbs). Research into the
prevention of recurrence and treatment of metastases are also included here.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
32
5.1 Localized Therapies - Discovery and Development
Examples of science that would fit:
• Discovery and development of treatments administered locally that target the organ
and/or neighboring tissue directly, including but not limited to surgical interventions,
cryotherapy, local/regional hyperthermia, high-intensity, focused ultrasound,
radiotherapy, and brachytherapy
• Therapies with a component administered systemically but that act locally (e.g.,
photodynamic therapy, radioimmunotherapy and radiosensitizers)
• Development of methods of localized drug delivery
• Research into the development of localized therapies to prevent recurrence
• Guidance note: localized therapies are considered to be localized when the site of action
is the same as the site of administration.
5.2 Localized Therapies - Clinical Applications
Examples of science that would fit:
• Clinical testing and application of treatments administered locally that target the organ
and/or neighboring tissue directly, including but not limited to surgical interventions,
cryotherapy, local/regional hyperthermia, radiotherapy, and brachytherapy.
• Clinical testing and application of therapies with a component administered systemically
but that act locally (e.g., photodynamic therapy and radiosensitizers)
• Phase I, II, or III clinical trials of promising therapies that are administered locally
• Side effects, toxicity, and pharmacodynamics
• Clinical testing of localized therapies to prevent recurrence and prevent and treat
metastases
• Guidance note: localized therapies are considered to be localized when the site of action
is the same as the site of administration.
5.3 Systemic Therapies - Discovery and Development
Examples of science that would fit:
• Discovery and development of treatments administered systemically such as cytotoxic
or hormonal agents, novel systemic therapies such as immunologically directed
therapies (treatment vaccines, antibodies), gene therapy, angiogenesis inhibitors,
apoptosis inhibitors, whole body hyperthermia, bone marrow/stem cell transplantation,
differentiating agents, adjuvant and neo-adjuvant treatments
• Identifying mechanisms of action of existing cancer drugs and novel drug targets,
including cancer stem cells for the purposes of treatment/identifying drug targets
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
33
• Drug discovery and development, including drug metabolism, pharmacokinetics,
pharmacodynamics, combinatorial chemical synthesis, drug screening, development of
high throughput assays, and testing in model systems, including that which may aid
treatment planning in stratified/personalised medicine
• Investigating the molecular mechanisms of drug resistance (including the role of cancer
stem cells) and pre-clinical evaluation of therapies to circumvent resistance
• Development of methods of drug delivery
• Research into the development of systemic therapies to prevent recurrence
5.4 Systemic Therapies - Clinical Applications
Examples of science that would fit:
• Clinical testing and application of treatments administered systemically such as
cytotoxic or hormonal agents, novel systemic therapies such as immunologically
directed therapies (treatment vaccines, antibodies), gene therapy, angiogenesis
inhibitors, apoptosis inhibitors, whole body hyperthermia, bone marrow/stem cell
transplantation, and differentiating agents
• Phase I, II, or III clinical trials of promising therapies administered systemically
• Side effects, toxicity, and pharmacodynamics
• Clinical testing of systemic therapies to prevent recurrence and prevent and treat
metastases
5.5 Combinations of Localized and Systemic Therapies
Examples of science that would fit:
• Development and testing of combined local and systemic approaches to treatment (e.g.,
radiotherapy and chemotherapy, or surgery and chemotherapy)
• Clinical application of combined approaches to treatment such as systemic cytotoxic
therapy and radiation therapy
• Development and clinical application of combined localized and systemic therapies to
prevent recurrence and prevent and treat metastases
5.6 Complementary and Alternative Treatment Approaches
Examples of science that would fit:
• Discovery, development, and clinical application of complementary/alternative
medicine (CAM) treatment approaches such as diet, herbs, supplements, natural
substances, or other interventions that are not widely used in conventional medicine or
are being applied in different ways as compared to conventional medical uses
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
34
• Complementary/alternative or non-pharmaceutical approaches to prevent recurrence
and prevent and treat metastases
5.7 Resources and Infrastructure Related to Treatment and the Prevention of Recurrence
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informatics and informatics networks; for example, clinical trials networks and
databanks
• Mathematical and computer simulations
• Specimen resources (serum, tissue, etc.)
• Clinical trial groups
• Epidemiological resources pertaining to treatment
• Statistical methodology or biostatistical methods
• Drugs and reagents for distribution and drug screening infrastructures
• Centers, consortia, and/or networks
• Development and characterization of new model systems for treatment, distribution of
models to scientific community or research into novel ways of applying model systems,
including but not limited to computer-simulation systems, software development, in
vitro/cell culture models, organ/tissue models or animal model systems. Guidance note:
this should only be used where the focus of the award is creating a model. If it is only a
tool or a methodology, code to the research instead.
• Reviews/meta-analyses of clinical effectiveness of therapeutics/treatments
• Education and training of investigators at all levels (including clinicians and other health
professionals), such as participation in training workshops, conferences, advanced
research technique courses, and Master's course attendance. This does not include
longer term research based training, such as Ph.D. or post-doctoral fellowships.
6 - CANCER CONTROL, SURVIVORSHIP, AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH
Research included in this category includes a broad range of areas: patient care and pain
management; tracking cancer cases in the population; beliefs and attitudes that affect
behavior regarding cancer control; ethics; education and communication approaches for
patients, family/caregivers, and health care professionals; supportive and end-of-life care;
and health care delivery in terms of quality and cost effectiveness.
6.1 Patient Care and Survivorship Issues
Examples of science that would fit:
• Research into patient-centered outcomes
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
35
• Quality of life
• Pain management
• Psychological impacts of cancer survivorship
• Rehabilitation, including reconstruction and replacement
• Economic sequelae, including research on employment, return to work, and
vocational/educational impacts on survivors and their families/caregivers
• Reproductive issues
• Long-term issues (morbidity, health status, social and psychological pathways)
• Symptom management, including nausea, vomiting, lymphedema, neuropathies, etc.
• Prevention and management of long-term treatment-related toxicities and sequelae,
including symptom management (e.g., physical activity or other interventions),
prevention of mucosities, prevention of cardiotoxicities, opportunistic infections, etc.
• Psychological, educational or complementary/alternative (e.g., hypnotherapy,
relaxation, transcendental meditation, imagery, spiritual healing, massage, biofeedback,
herbs, spinal manipulation, yoga, acupuncture) interventions/approaches to promote
behaviors that lessen treatment-related morbidity and promote psychological
adjustment to the diagnosis of cancer and to treatment effects
• Burdens of cancer on family members/caregivers and interventions to assist family
members/caregivers
• Educational interventions to promote self-care and symptom management
• Research into peer support, self-help, and other support groups
• Behavioral factors in treatment compliance
6.2 Surveillance
Examples of science that would fit:
• Epidemiology and end results reporting (e.g., SEER)
• Registries that track incidence, morbidity, co-morbidities/symptoms, long-term effects
and/or mortality related to cancer
• Surveillance of established cancer risk factors in populations such as diet, body weight,
physical activity, sun exposure, and tobacco use
• Analysis of variations in established cancer risk factor exposure in populations by
demographic, geographic, economic, or other factors
• Trends in use of interventional strategies in populations (e.g., geographic variation)
6.3 Population-based Behavioral Factors
Examples of science that would fit:
• Research into populations’ attitudes and belief systems (including cultural beliefs) and
their influence on behaviors related to cancer control, outcomes and treatment. For
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
36
example, how populations’ beliefs can affect compliance/interaction with all aspects of
the health care/service provision
6.4 Health Services, Economic and Health Policy Analyses
Examples of science that would fit:
• Development and testing of health service delivery methods
• Interventions to increase the quality of health care delivery
• Impact of organizational, social, and cultural factors on access to care and quality of
care, including studies on variations or inequalities in access among racial, ethnic,
geographical or socio-economic groups
• Studies of providers such as geographical or care-setting variations in outcomes
• Effect of reimbursement and/or insurance on cancer control, outcomes, and
survivorship support
• Health services research, including health policy and practice
• Analysis of health service provision, including the interaction of primary and secondary
care
• Analyses of the cost effectiveness of methods used in cancer prevention, detection,
diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, and survivor care/support
6.5 Education and Communication Research
Examples of science that would fit:
• Development of generic health provider-patient communication tools and methods
(e.g., telemedicine/health)
• Tailoring educational approaches or communication to different populations (e.g.,
social, racial, geographical, or linguistic groups)
• Research into new educational and communication methods and approaches, including
special approaches and considerations for underserved and at-risk populations
• Research on new methods and strategies to disseminate cancer information/innovation
to healthcare providers (e.g., web-based information, telemedicine, smartphone apps,
etc.) and the effectiveness of these approaches
• Research on new communication processes and/or media and information technologies
within the health care system and the effectiveness of these approaches
• Media studies focused on the nature and ways in which information on cancer and
cancer research findings are communicated to the general public
• Education, information, and assessment systems for the general public, primary care
professionals, or policy makers
• Research into barriers to successful health communication
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
37
6.6 End-of-Life Care
Examples of science that would fit:
• Hospice/end-of-life patient care focused on managing pain and other symptoms (e.g.,
respiratory distress, delirium) and the provision of psychological, social, spiritual and
practical support through either conventional or complementary/alternative
interventions/approaches throughout the last phase of life and into bereavement
• Quality of life and quality of death for terminally-ill patients
• Provision of psychological, social, spiritual and practical support to families/caregivers
through either conventional or complementary/alternative interventions/approaches
• Research into the delivery of hospice care
6.7 Research on Ethics and Confidentiality
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informed consent modeling/framing and development
• Quality of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)
• Protecting patient confidentiality and privacy
• Research ethics
• Research on publication bias within the cancer research field
6.8 – Historical code [no longer used]
6.9 Resources and Infrastructure Related to Cancer Control, Survivorship, and Outcomes
Research
Examples of science that would fit:
• Informatics and informatics networks
• Clinical trial groups related to cancer control, survivorship, and outcomes research
• Epidemiological resources pertaining to cancer control, survivorship, and outcomes
research
• Statistical methodology or biostatistical methods pertaining to cancer control,
survivorship and outcomes research
• Surveillance infrastructures
• Centers, consortia, and/or networks pertaining to cancer control, survivorship and
outcomes research
• Development and characterization of new model systems for cancer control, outcomes
or survivorship, distribution of models to scientific community or research into novel
ways of applying model systems, including but not limited to computer-simulation
systems, software development, in vitro/cell culture models, organ/tissue models or
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
38
animal model systems. Guidance note: this should only be used where the focus of the
award is creating a model. If it is only a tool or a methodology, code to the research
instead.
• Psychosocial, economic, political and health services research frameworks and models
• Education and training of investigators at all levels (including clinicians and other health
professionals), such as participation in training workshops, conferences, advanced
research technique courses, and Master's course attendance. This does not include
longer-term research-based training, such as Ph.D. or post-doctoral fellowships.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
39
APPENDIX B: SAMPLES OF GENERAL AUDIENCE SUMMARIES
1. Clinical and Epidemiology Research
Title: Characterization of Early Breast Cancer by Contrast-Enhanced MRI
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) shows great promise as a supplementary tool to
mammography and clinical exam for diagnosis and staging of breast cancer. Most research in
this area has focused on diagnosis of invasive breast cancer. We have been interested in
improving the ability of MRI to characterize early cancer, particularly at the pre-invasive stage.
At the present time, the accuracy of MRI to for diagnosing pre-invasive breast disease, or ductal
carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is low, mainly because the pattern of contrast enhancement for DCIS is
difficult to distinguish from that of benign proliferative disease in the breast. An important
emerging application for MRI is screening and surveillance in women at increased risk of
developing breast cancer. There are now genetic tests and statistical models that can accurately
predict a woman’s risk. However, there are few effective options for prevention and early
detection. Women with a genetic risk of developing cancer are also likely to develop cancer at an
early age when breast tissue is dense and mammography effectiveness is limited. MRI is very
sensitive to small cancers and not limited by breast density. The studies we propose will address
the specificity of MRI for early cancer and will have direct application to MRI screening and
surveillance methods. We believe that in the future, a better understanding of the biological basis
of patterns on MRI may lead to new methods for identifying breast tissue that is at risk for
developing cancer.
2. Cancer Control and Prevention Research:
Title: Distrust as a Barrier to Cancer Screening and Prevention
Over the past 40 years technological advancements have had a major impact on medicine in the
United States. These advancements have led to the development of effective methods in cancer
screening and, most recently, cancer prevention. These methods have the potential to greatly
reduce the burden of cancer, but are being threatened by the rising levels of distrust of physicians
and the health care system. This project will investigate the issue of distrust with the goals of
increasing understanding of health care related distrust in the US today and investigating the
relationship between health care related distrust and attitudes, intentions, and behaviors
regarding cancer screening and prevention.
We will focus on a population composed of African American, Caucasian, and Hispanic women
to elucidate the relationship between health care related distrust and historically disadvantaged
ethnic/racial minorities. These women will be between the ages of 40 and 70, a group for whom
effective cancer screening is available and recommended. In order to determine the patterns of
health care related distrust and association between distrust and attitudes towards cancer
screening and prevention, we will conduct a population-based telephone survey in the United
States. We will examine several types of cancer related health behaviors and investigate how
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
40
distrust may act as a barrier to adopting these behaviors. These behaviors will include adherence
with current cancer screening recommendations for breast, cervical and colon cancer as well as
willingness to use new interventions for cancer screening and prevention.
This project builds upon our prior work that has provided a more in-depth understanding of
health care related distrust and established the association between health care related distrust
and use of Pap smear, clinical breast examination, and influenza vaccination in the City of
Philadelphia. This grant will allow us to identify the factors and beliefs the population may have
about health care and physicians and determine what role distrust plays as a barrier to cancer
screening and prevention. These findings will have the direct potential to improve the delivery
of effective cancer screening and prevention behaviors.
3. Basic Research:
Title: Regulation of Chromosome Segregation in Human Cells
The information which controls all of the operations of a cell is contained within its DNA, which
is packaged into units called chromosomes. When a cell divides, these chromosomes must be
duplicated. During duplication each chromosome is connected to its copy, therefore, the
duplicated chromosomes must be properly unlinked from one another, so that each new cell
receives or inherits exactly the same genetic information as all of the other cells. Errors in this
process, known as chromosome segregation, result in extra chromosomes in some cells and too
few chromosomes in others. Such errors are widespread among most cancer cells, and are
believed to promote the growth and progression of disease. Our long term goal is to understand
the molecules and mechanisms that control chromosome segregation in human cells. Towards
this aim, we have begun to analyze a critical enzyme, appropriately named separase, which
functions like a “molecular scissors” to split apart linked chromosomes as cells prepare to divide.
Separase acts irreversibly in this process and thus needs to be controlled very precisely, to avoid
potentially catastrophic errors. In this proposal, we will investigate the ways in which separase
is turned on and turned off during cell division. Using a series of complementary approaches,
including a novel method we invented several years ago for manipulating genes inside human
cells, we will define how the chromosome-splitting process is controlled at the molecular level,
and how that control ensures the high level of accuracy of chromosome segregation. Ultimately,
we hope to translate this knowledge into new strategies for detecting and eliminating cells that
cannot segregate their chromosomes accurately, before they have the opportunity to develop into
cancers.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
41
APPENDIX C: SAMPLE OF STRUCTURED TECHNICAL ABSTRACT
Title of Project: Structure and Function of DNA Replication Origins in Yeast
Background: The initiation of DNA replication marks a crucial step in the eukaryotic cell
cycle. Entering S phase commits the cell to a full round of cell division. Studies in the
budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, have driven the field during the past decade,
although our data and work by others suggest that many aspects of DNA replication are highly
conserved in all eukaryotes, including humans. Origin structure has been best described for
autonomously replicating sequence (ARS) function. Different origins have a different domain
organization, and it is unclear how these differences impact the initiation of DNA replication.
Recently, we have shown that initiation events occur at distinct nucleotide positions in yeast, a
feature that appears to be conserved in humans.
Objective/Hypothesis: Our preliminary studies indicate that origin organization dictates
where replication initiates. Therefore, we propose to define how features of ARS elements
contribute to the precise initiation mechanism.
Specific Aims: (1) To determine whether chromosomal origins other than ARS1 initiate DNA
replication at a distinct site; (2) to identify what determines the replication start point within
origins; and (3) to determine if chromatin structure affects the initiation pattern at ARS
elements.
Study design: Using a technique that we have recently developed, replication initiation point
mapping, we will first map the nucleotide positions at which replication initiates in wild-type
and mutant ARS elements. To address the issue of what role chromatin configuration plays in
origin activation, we will analyze the nucleosomal organization of different ARS loci in
relation to those regions where the parental DNA double-strand unwinds first. We will
correlate the sites of initiation with sites of unwinding and place those into context with the
overall chromatin structure at a given chromosomal ARS locus.
Cancer relevance: These studies will contribute to our understanding of the mechanism
underlying origin activation in yeast and will aid us in understanding origin function in more
complex, higher eukaryotes. Since uncontrolled origin activity directly translates into
uncontrolled growth, the long-term goal of our studies is to apply our knowledge and
techniques to human DNA replication in order to inhibit proliferation of cancerous cells.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
42
APPENDIX D: REVIEWER GUIDELINE CRITERIA
PART I – CANDIDATE
Investigator:
Provide an overall evaluation of the candidate’s academic, clinical, and/or scientific qualifications, their
potential to succeed as an independent investigator, and their commitment to a career in cancer-related
research. Assess the qualifications of the applicant considering the following items: goals and
commitment to cancer-related research; past education; past training – board eligible or board certified,
if appropriate; past research experience; number and impact of previous publications; and overall
appropriateness of the candidate for an RSG.
The RSG award is intended for fully independent scientists with clear evidence of institutional
commitment (e.g. tenure-track, start-up funds, independent space, senior author publications) as
confirmed in the Letter of Support from their Department Chair (in grant application STATEMENT OF
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT – See template 9.1).
REPLY TO PREVIOUS REVIEWS [IF APPLICABLE]
Note whether this is a resubmission and comment on adequacy of response to critiques.
PART II – RESEARCH PLAN
It is critical to evaluate rather than summarize the research plan. Please be specific and
detailed in your critique including, at a minimum, the following elements:
1. Significance: Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in
the field? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical
capability, and/or clinical practice improve? How will successful completion of the aims change
the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive
this field?
2. Cancer Relevance: How is this research relevant or how will it impact persons at risk for, or
living with, cancer or their family/caregivers? The relevance to cancer may be indirect, but the
connection must be clearly articulated by the applicant.
3. Innovation/Improvement: What is the potential that the proposed study will challenge and seek
to shift current research understanding or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel
theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Does the
research propose meaningful improvements or address critical gaps?
4. Investigator/ Research Team: Does the PI and research team have the training and experience
needed to carry out the proposed research?
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
43
5. Approach: Are study design, methods for implementation, data collection and analysis
appropriate for answering the research question. Where appropriate, are proposed recruitment
and/or case ascertainment methods well developed? Is the sample size adequate? Is the research
timeline realistic? Are future plans articulated?
6. Environment: Will the scientific environment and institutional support contribute to the
probability of success? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific
environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements? Are there competitive start-up
funds to support the candidate’s independent research program?
7. Statement of Science Outreach and Advocacy (FEEDBACK OPTIONAL, THIS SECTION
SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN CONSIDERATION OF SCORING). Does the outreach and
advocacy plan present any concerns (including, but not limited to, research compliance,
participant safety, and/or feasibility)? Do you have any suggestions to improve the plan?
PART III – BUDGET
Evaluate the overall budget and individual budget categories with respect to the award cap and
the project aims. Are the budget items justified, specified, and accurate? Is the project duration
and the percent effort of key personnel appropriate? Is there a potential overlap with the PI’s
other funded research? Describe any suggested budget changes - use specific amounts or
percentages.
JUSTIFICATION OF BUDGET:
Please note that the full budget justification information is provided online at
proposalCENTRAL. If you print it in the “single-click”, it will be truncated.
Key Project Personnel: Any recommended changes (i.e., percent effort, team composition,
expertise)?
Research Materials and Animals: Any specific and/or broad recommendations for changes
with proposed items or amounts? Do not include budget concerns in your overall scoring
evaluation.
Other Support: Note any issues of potential overlap.
PART IV - COMPLIANCE STATEMENTS
1. Human Subjects. If applicable, evaluate the plans for protection of human subjects from
research risks justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed. For
example, are the potential benefits & risks to subjects articulated reasonable and appropriate
given the study design? Are their plans for conducting sub-analysis by group, data security and
confidentiality, biohazards and data and safety monitoring adequate.
2. Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children. When the proposed project involves human
subjects, evaluate the adequacy of the proposed plans for inclusion or exclusion of minorities,
male and female genders, as well as children.
Research Scholar Grant Instructions July 2019
44
3. Vertebrate Animals. Evaluate the plan for live, vertebrate animals as part of the scientific
assessment according to the following points: 1) necessity for the use of the animals and species
proposed; 2) appropriateness of the strains, ages, and gender; 3) justifications for, and
appropriateness of, the numbers of animals.
4. Biohazards. Assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to
research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate
protection is proposed.
Priority Focus on Health Equity Research in the Cancer Control and Prevention Research
Grants Program
For health equity applications in Cancer Control and Prevention, reviewers will assess the
potential impact of the proposed study, if the specific aims are successfully accomplished. For
example, how will this research: (1) substantially improve equity in access to cancer prevention,
early detection, diagnosis, and/or treatment services; (2) accelerate efforts to reduce cancer
burden or costs, improve quality of care, delivery or care or quality of life; or (3) impact public
policy to advance health equity relevant to cancer? The reviewer critique should include a
summary of the targeted area(s) of health equity proposed, the study population, determinates of
health that will be explored and the levels of influence (individual, interpersonal, organizational,
community, or public policy) being targeted.